LIBRARY 


University  of  California. 


GIF^T  OF^ 


e«wJUL    UrvCv^ 


Accession .9.9.7.19 Clcus 


7^f 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/caseconstructionOOnevirich 


THE 


CASE-CONSTRUCTION 


AFTER 


THE  COMPARATIVE  IN  LATIN 


A  Thesis  presented  to  the  University  Faculty  of  Cornell 

University,  for  the  Degree  of  Doctor  of 

Philosophy,  June,  1901 


BY 


K.  P.  R.  NEVIIvLE 


ITHACA,  N.  Y. 
I90I 


THE 


CASE^CONSTRUCTION 


AFTER 


THE  COMPARATIVE  IN  LATIN 


A  Thesis  presented  to  the  University  Faculty  of  Cornell 

University,  for  the  Degree  of  Doctor  of 

Philosophy,  June,  1901 


BY 


K.  P.  R.  NEVILLE 


^  OFTHE 


UNlVERSiTV 


ITHACA,  N.  Y. 
1 901 


^^*i> 


(^  Copyright,  1 901, 
By  CoRNEivi*  University 

AI,I,  RIGHTS  RESERVED 


ITHACA,  N.  Y. 

PRESS  OF  ANDRUS   &  CHURCH 

1 901 


PA  a  IS) 
MA/f\l 


TABIvK  OF  CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

Introduction i 

Comparison  instituted  with  a  nominative — Comparative  adjective  in  an 

oblique  case 4 

Comparison  instituted  with  a  genitive 6 

Genitive  of  the  whole 8 

Genitive  replaced  by  relative  pronoun  or  adjective 10 

Comparison  instituted  with  a  dative 11 

Comparison  instituted  with  an  accusative 14 

Comparison  instituted  with  an  ablative 24 

One  member  of  the  comparison  modified 26 

A  clause  modifier 26 

A  genitive  modifier 29 

An  adjective  modifier 31 

Comparative  adjective  modified  by  a  dative 31 

Comparison  between  adjectives  modifying  same  noun 32 

Adjectives  compared  by  means  of  magis 33 

Comparative  modified  by  ablative  of  degree  of  difference 34 

Comparative  in  subjunctive  clauses 37 

Genitive  of  price  expressed  by  Comparative 39 

Comparative  adjective  agrees  with  a  nominative  as  first  term  of  the  com- 
parison      40 

Universal  Negatives 45 

Rhetorical  Questions 52 

A  pronoun  sums  up  a  finite  construction 58 

Proverbial  expressions 59 

Alius  alio 66 

Opinione,  spe,  aequo,  iusto,  etc 67 

Plus,  minus,  longius,  amplius 69 

General  Adverbs 80 

Conclusions 85 

Addenda  et  Corrigenda 87 


98719 


PREFACE. 


For  the  citations  in  this  paper  I  have  used  the  Teubner  series, 
in  the  belief  that  they  were  the  most  accessible,  complete  texts  of 
the  authors  included  in  the  investigation.  The  reading  and 
lining  of  Bernay's  edition  has  been  used  for  I^ucretius ;  Kussner 
has  been  followed  in  Sallust ;  Peter  for  fragments  of  the  his- 
torians ;  Baehrens  for  fragments  of  the  poets  ;  and  Bickf ord-Smith 
for  Publilius  Syrus. 

The  abbreviations,  for  the  most  part,  require  no  explanation  ; 
but  for  Cicero's  Philosophical  Works  and  Orations  the  notation 
employed  by  Merguet  has  been  adopted. 

I  must  thank  Professor  C.  B.  Bennett,  of  Cornell  University, 
under  whose  direction  this  volume  of  the  Studies  has  been  pre- 
pared, for  his  untiring  assistance  and  indispensable  advice. 

K.  P.  R.  NEVILLE. 

Cornell  University , 
June  ^5,  igoi. 


INTRODUCTORY. 
Scope  and  Purpose  of  the  Investigation. 

Tradition  is  a  factor  whose  potency  in  moulding  the  conceptions 
and  methods  of  thought  of  the  present  is  beyond  question.  It  is 
in  matters  of  reUgious  and  vSocial  institutions,  perhaps,  that  we 
oftenest  see  the  result  of  its  influence  ;  no  enthusiast  as  yet, 
however,  has  felt  himself  called  upon  to  point  out  that  a  blind 
confidence  in  tradition  is  responsible  for  many  mistakes  in  our 
current  Latin  syntax.  For  example,  we  have  always  believed, 
without  hesitation,  the  doctrine  of  the  grammarians^  who  in  their 
treatment  of  refert  and  interest  state  that  *  this  interests  you '  is 
rendered  by  *  hoc  vestra  interest '  ;  but  '  this  interests  you  all ' ,  by 
*  om?iium  vestrum  hoc  interest '.  Yet,  on  examination,  it  is  found 
that  there  is  no  example  of  this  latter  construction  in  extant 
Latinity.  Only  when  the  material  for  forming  a  judgment  is 
statistically  complete,  can  we  undertake  with  confidence  to  state  a 
principle  of  syntactical  usage.  The  following  investigation  is  an 
attempt  to  present  the  material  and  draw  conclusions  for  a  single 
idiom — the  comparative  construction.  My  treatment  is  confined 
to  the  examples  to  be  found  in  the  Republican  literature. 

The  Latin  sentence  that  we  render  in  English  by  *  he  is  taller 
than  his  brother '  may  assume  either  of  two  forms  : 

1.  Grandior  est  quam  f rater  suus  : 

2.  Grandior  est  fratre  suo  ; 

i.  e.,  the  second  element  of  the  comparison  may  be  expressed 
by  quam  -f  the  proper  case  ;  or  by  the  ablative  without  quam. 
The  query  naturally  suggests  itself  :  When  do  we  have  the  one, 
when  the  other?  Is  there  any  rule?  None  of  the  existing 
answers  to  this  question  are  adequate, — a  fault  that  must  be  attri- 
buted primarily  to  the  fact  that  no  collection  of  all  the  material 

*See  Engelmann-Schneider,  |  207,  i,  and  Landgraf,  \  135. 


2  Introductory. 

bearing  on  it  has  ever  been  made.  Fischer^  seems  to  have  been 
the  first  to  recognize  the  possibility  that  the  two  constructions  are, 
in  a  measure,  mutually  exclusive  :  but  his  treatment  is  unsatis- 
factory. He  has  allowed  a  desire  for  general  declarations,  wide 
in  application,  to  supplant  lucidity  :  his  exposition  is  so  intricate 
that  we  must  carefully  consider  the  examples  he  cites  before  his 
meaning  is  at  all  clear.  Kiihner's^  discussion  of  the  phenomena 
of  comparative  sentences  is  the  most  thorough  that  has  as  yet 
been  presented — clear,  concise  and  accurate  so  far  as  his  material 
goes.  I^andgraf,  Klotz*,  Schmalz^  have  in  short  compass  each 
given  very  valuable  results  for  the  speeches  of  Cicero.  Most 
other  grammarians  err  in  making  the  content  of  the  portion  of  the 
sentence  that  follows  the  comparative  the  cause  of  its  assuming 
the  form  it  has.  It  is  preferable,  I  believe,  to  seek  in  theyi7rw  of 
thQ  first  part  of  the  sentence  the  clue  to  the  form  of  the  second. 

The  many  demonstrable  inaccuracies  in  current  views  concern- 
ing the  ablative  of  comparison,  and  the  absolute  lack  of  adequate 
data  for  any  view,  are  sufiicient  justification  for  a  new  treatment 
of  this  entire  subject.  My  examination  has  resulted  in  the  recog- 
nition of  numerous  categories,  yet  no  more,  I  am  convinced,  than 
necessity  actually  warrants.  While  these  categories  will  hold  in  the 
main,  yet  to  nearly  all  there  will  be  found  exceptions  ;  some  of 
these  are  capable  of  esplanation,  some  not.  But  we  must  reflect 
that  no  living  language  can  be  made  subject  to  inviolable  rules. 
Any  language  which  is  spoken  as  well  as  written,  will  not  be, 
under  all  circumstances,  in  the  hands  of  its  different  writers, 
what  may  be  termed  ' strictly  grammatical'.  Absolute,  invariable 
canons  must  not  be  expected  in   a  question  of  this  nature  ; — it 

^  Latin  Grammar  (revised  edition  published  at  New  York,  1876),  §626^ 
2,  Obs.  15  ff. 

"^  Ausfiihrliche  Grammatik  der  lat.  Sprache,  I  225,  II,  3  ff. 
'  Footnote  to  p.  665  of  Reisig's  Vorl.  iiber  lat.  Sprachwissenschaft. 
*  Lat.  Stilistik,  pp.  15-18. 

^Syntax,  in  Miiller's  Handbuch  der  Class.  Altertumswissenschaft,  II', 
?92. 


Introductory,  3 

should  be  siiflicient,  if  we  can  deduce  some  unmistakable  ten- 
dencies. 

From  the  very  nature  of  the  subject  we  can  be  concerned  with 
comparisons  between  substantives  (and  adjectives)  only,  because 
these  alone  can  show  an  ablative  case.  Such  sentences  as  the  fol- 
lowing are  beyond  the  scope  of  the  investigation  : 

He  is  braver  than  he  was  {quam  fuit)  ; 

He  is  braver  now  than  formerly  {quam  antehac).  There  is  no 
question  as  to  what  must  appear  in  such  cases. 

Let  us  see  if  it  is  possible  to  narrow,  still  further,  the  range 
within  which  the  ablative  appears.  It  is  generally  noted  that  the 
ablative  of  comparison  takes  the  place,  always,  of  a  nominative  or 
of  an  accusative.^  But  in  the  period  under  consideration  it  never 
takes  the  place  of  either,  if  the  comparative  adjective  is 
not  in  agreement  with  a  nominative  or  an  accusative  that 
constitutes  the  first  term  of  the  comparison,  i.e.,  if  the 
comparison  happens  to  be  between  two  nouns  the  first  of  which  is 
in  the  nominative,  while  the  comparative  is  in  the  genitive,  dative, 
accusative,  or  ablative,  in  agreement  with  some  other  noun,  the 
comparison  will  be  effected  by  quam,  and  another  nominative  will 
follow  it ;  but,  if  the  substantive  is  in  the  accusative  and  the  ad- 
jective in  the  comparative  degree  modifies  it,  then  entirely  dif- 
ferent principles  determine  usage  (see  Category  IV). 

'  Riemann  and  Goelzer,  Grammaire  Compar^e  du  Grec  et  Latin,  |  158* 
Rem.,  II  :  etc. 


CATEGORIES  OF  CONSTRUCTIONS. 
I. 

The  comparison  is  instituted  with  a  nominative  ; 

A. 

The  adjective  agrees  with  some  noun  in  the  genitive,  dative, 
or  ablative  ;  quam  with  the  nominative  always  follows. 

Plautus. 

Cas.  73 :  maioreque  opere  ibi  serviles  nuptiae  Quam  liberales 
etiam  curari  solent.  Merc.  817  :  Ecastor  lege  dura  vivont  mu- 
lieres    Multoque   iniquiore   miserae  quam   viri.  Tri7i.    1029  : 

Potius  in  maiore  honore  hie  essent  quam  mores  mali.  Here  the 
quam  might  be  due  to  the  presence  of  the  adverb  potius  (Cate- 
gory XXI),  but  it  is  quite  as  probable  that  maiore  is  the  factor 
that  leads  to  the  employment  of  qiiam. 

Lucretius. 

IV,  480  :  Quid  maiore  fide  porro  quam  sensus   haberi   libet  ? 

IV,  698  :    Deinde  videri   licet  maioribus  esse  creatum  principiis 

quam    vox.         V,    455  :     multoque    minoribu'     sunt     dementis 

quam  tellus,  where  the  presence  of  multo  would  necessitate  quam 

(Category  X). 

Cicero. 

Fam.  IV,  3,  2  :  mihi  videris  meliore  esse  condicione  quam  nos, 
qui  videmus.  Fam,  VI,  1,6:  aut  perdita  non  afflictiore  con- 
dicione quam  ceteri.  Fam.  VII,  10,  2  :  de  tuis  rebus,  quae  . 
.  .  mihi  non  minori  curae  sunt  quam  meae.  Qui7ict.  13,  44  : 
tu  potes  discedere  molestia  minore  quam  Quinctius.  Caec.  7, 
18  :  is  deteriore  iure  esset  quam  ceteri  cives.  C.  68  :  senex  est 

eo  meliore  condicione  quam  adulescens.  De  Or.  II,  80,  329  : 
maiore  periculo  haec  pars  orationis  obscura  est  quam  ceterae. 
Leg.  Agra.  Ill,  2,  7  :  Etiamne  meliore  (sc.  iurej  quam  paterna 


Comparison  Instihded  zvith  a  Nomi7iative.  5 

et  avita  ?  Leg.  Agra.  Ill,  2,  9  :  Libera  meliore  iure  sunt  qiiam 
serva.  Leg.  Agra.  Ill,  2,  9  :  Soluta  meliore  in  causa  sunt 
quatn  obligata.  Leg.  Agra.  Ill,  2,8:  Ut  meliore  iure  fundus 
Hirpinus  sit  sive  ager  Hirpinus  quani  mens  paternus  avitusque 
fundus     Arpinas.  Cluent.    37,    103  :     Sedatiore    tempore   est 

accusatus  quani  Junius.  Phil.  XIII,  21,  47:  Sanctiore  erunt 
iure  legati  quam  duo  consules  contra  quos  .  .  .  .  ;  quam  Caesar, 
cuius  patris  ....  This  is  also  an  example  of  Category  VI. 
Dom.  24,  64 :  dubitarem  hoc  meliore  condicione  esse  quam 
Decii. 

B. 

There  are  several  examples  where  the  first  noun  of  the  com- 
parison is  in  the  nominative  case,  while  the  comparative  adjective 
is  in  the  accusative  in  agreement  with  some  other  noun.  Here 
likewise  quam  is  used  to  effect  the  comparison  and  the  nomina- 
tive will  follow  it. 

Cicero. 

Lig.  4,  10  :  Accusas  eum,  qui  causam  habet  aut,  ut  ego  dico, 
meliorem  quam  tu  aut,  ut  tu  vis,  parem.  Favt.  VIII,  12,  3  : 
ut  maiorem  Appio  dolorem  fama  quam  postulatio  attulerit. 
Flacc.  29,  71  :  miseriores  habeas  quam  aut  Mithridates  aut  etiam 
pater  tuus  habuit  umquam.  De  Invent.  I,  31,  52  :  si  vicinus 
tuus  equum  meliorem  habeat  quam  tuus  est.  There  is  no 
more  reason  for  setting  this  sentence  up  as  a  standard  for  the  trans- 
lation of  '  he  has  a  better  house  than  yours  '  ^  than  the  first  sentence 
quoted  in  this  sub-category.  They  are  the  sole  instances  to  be 
cited  in  support  of  either  position.  Sex.  Rose.  11,  31  :  possit 
vim  maiorem  adhibere  metus  quam  fides. 

Varro. 

L.  L.  V,  123  :  sinum  maiorem  cavationem  quam  pocula  habebat. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  I,  40,  5  :  minorem  laudem  exercitus  quam  imperator. 
B.  G.  I,  53,  6  :  quae  res  non  minorem  quam  ipsa  victoria  volup- 
tatem  attulit. 

'  Kiihner,  I,at.  Gram.,  ii,  ^  225,  4. 


Comparison  Instihited  with  a  Genitive. 
II. 


The  comparison  is  instituted  with  a  genitive  :  quam  with  a 
genitive  follows.  The  first  example  under  this  category  appears 
in  Cicero,  unless  we  wish  to  incorporate  here  Plaut.  Riid.  6i8  f. , 
vindicate,  ne  impiorum  potior  sit  poUentia  Quam  innocentum,  qui 
se  scelere  fieri  nolunt  nobiles.  But  this  may  just  as  reasonabl}^  be 
due  to  the  influence  of  the  ^z^/-clause. 

Cicero. 

Sull.  31,  89  ;  Huic  misero  notiora  sunt  itinera  iudiciorum  et 
fori  quam  campi  etdisciplinarum.  C/«^«/.  52,  144  :  Adfirmabat 
....  non  se  cupidiorem  esse  civitatis  retinendae  quam  existima- 
tionis.  Verr.  I,  24,  62  :  Ecquo  in  oppido  pedem  posuit,   ubi 

non  plura  stuprorum  flagitiorumque  suorum  quam  adventus  sui 
vestigia  reliquerit?  Verr.  IV,  63,  140  :  Ubi  eorum  dolorem  ex 

illius  iniuriis  non  modo  minorem  sed  prope  maiorem  quam  Sicu- 
lorum  ceterorum  esse  cognovi.  Mil.  30,  81  :  Nisi  vero  gratius 
putat  esse  vobis  sui  se  capitis  quam  vestri  defensorem  fuisse. 
Verr.  II,  4,  10 :  plures  partes  defensionis  quam  accusationis 
suscepisse.  Caec.    16,    47  :     homines   possessionis   cupidiores 

quam  vitae.  Font.  14,  32  :  Gravior  hostium  voluntas  quam 
civium.  Phil.  V,  2,  4:  honestiora  decreta  legionum  quam 
senatus.  Phil.  V,  17,  48  :  virtutis  esse  quam  aetatis  cursum 
celeriorem.  Phil.    X,    8,    16 :    virtutis   robore    firmior   quam 

aetatis.  Phil.  XI,  4,  9  :  maior  vis  est  aninii  quam  corporis. 
Phil.  XIII,  4,  7  :  nullius  auctoritas  maior  est  quam  M.  Lepidi. 
Catil.  IV,  ID,  22  :  condicio  melior  externae  victoriae  quam  do- 
mesticae.  Piso,  39,  95  :  maior  indicium  et  rei  publicae  poena 
quam  Rutili.  Place.  41,  103:  acriorem  improbum  memoriam 
esse  quam  bonorum.  Quint.  I,  i,  4,  13:  maioraque  dignitatis 
insignia  quam  potestatis.  Qui7it.  I,  i,  5,  15  :  quern  tui  anianti- 
orem  quam  temporis,  Att.  IX,  5,  2  :  funestiorem  diem  Alli- 
ensis  pugnae  quam  urbis  captae.  Att.  XVI,  2,  4:  exploratior 
devitatio    legionum  quam    piratarum.  Fam.    I,    7,    2  :    offici 


Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Genitive.  7 

maiorem  auctoritatem  qiiam  sententiae.  Fam.  X,  4,  2  :  magis 
prudentiae  plena  quam  fidelitatis.  Fam.  X,  8,  2  :  expeditius 
iter  communis  salutis  quam  meae  laudis.  Ep.  Brut.  I,  15,  13  : 
maiorem  rationem  tuae  voluntatis  quam  constantiae  meae.  Ep. 
Brut.  I,  16,  10  :  duriorem  condicionem  spectatae  virtutis  quam 
incognitae.  Pet.  Con.  12,  46  :  gratiorem  orationem  eius,  qui 
....  quam   illius,  qui  ....  hivent.    I,   43,   80  :    Quis  offici 

cupidior  quam  pecuniae?  Or.  55,    185  :    necessitatis  inventa 

antiquiora  quam  voluptatis.  De  Or.  I,  11,  47:  homines  con- 
tentionis  cupidiores  quam  veritatis.  De  Or.  I,  23,  106  :  elo- 
quentiae  maiorem  laudem  quam  humanitatis.  De  Or.  II,  67, 
271  :  maiora  forensium  actionum  quam  omnium  .sermonum  condi- 
menta.  De  Or.  Ill,  34,  137  :  cuius  eloquentia  instructior  quam 
Pisistrati.  Briit  18,  70:  Calamidis  (signa)  molliora  quam 
Canachi.  Brut.  21,  82:  huius  .  .  exiliores  orationes  et  redo- 
lentes  magis  quam  aut  lyaeli  aut  Scipionis  aut  etiam  ipsius  Catonis. 
T.  I,  49,    117:    melior  Hnni  quam  vSolonis  oratio.  O.  I,  75: 

eius    nomen    quam    Solonis   inlustrius.  O.   I,    145  :    maior  et 

melior  actionum  quam  vSonorum  concentus.  O.  II,  46  :   maiora 

opera  animi  quam  corporis.  O.  Ill,  87  :  piratarum  melior  fides 

quam  senatus.  F.  I,  55  :  maiores  et  voluptates  et  dolores  animi 
quam    corporis.  F.    II,    108  :    animi    dolores   maiores   quam 

corporis.  F.  II,  108  :  maiores  voluptates  et  dolores  animi  quam 
corporis.  F.  Ill,  41  :  maiorem  rerum  discrepantiam  quam 
verborum.  F.  Ill,  75  :  animi  liniamenta  pulchriora  quam 
corporis.  F.  IV,  62  :  eius  optabiliorem  vitam  melioremque  et 
magis  expetendam  quam  illius.  F.  V,  88  :  Metelli  vitam  certi- 
orem  quam  Reguli.  A.  II,  88  :  dormientium  et  vinulentorum 
et  furiosorum  imbecilliora  quam  vigilantium,  siccorum,  sanorum. 
L.  Ill,  34  :  graviora  indicia  vocis  quam  tabellae.  ^Y.  I,  112  : 
locupletior  hominum  natura  quam  deorum.  A^.  II,  40  :  solis 
candor  illustrior  quam  ullius  ignis.  Top.    18,  70  :   principura 

commoda  maiora  quam  reliquorum. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

IV,  34  :  salus  antiquior  militum  quam  impedimentorum. 


8  Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Genitive. 

Cornelius   Nepos. 
Eumenes  3,  i  :  salutis  quam  fidei  cupidior. 
Julius  Caesar. 

B.  G.  Ill,  13,  i:  Carinae  planiores  quam  nostrarnm  navium. 
Here  the  first  genitive  must  be  supplied  from  the  preceding 
sentence — namque  ipsorum  naves  ad  hunc  niodum  factae  arma- 
taeque  erant.  B.  G.  VIII,  proem.  :  cuius  rei  maior  nostra 
quam  reliquorum  admiratio.  • 

Publilius  Syrus. 

163  :  dolor  animi  morbus  gravior  quam  corporis. 

In  this  category  it  makes  no  difference  in  what  case  the  com- 
parative adjective  is  ;  the  form  of  expression  is  always  the  same. 
The  adjective  may  agree  with  the  genitive,  for  instance,  or  may 
be  nominative,  as  in  the  last  example  above. 


Such  a  large  percentage  of  the  genitives  that  institute  a 
comparison  come  under  the  category  of  the  '  genitive  of  the  whole ' 
that  it  has  been  deemed  advisable  to  quote  them  by  themseh^es. 
The  construction  occurs  after  plus  and  minus  and  is  invariably 
followed  by  quam. 

PLUS. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  643  :  Plus  aegri  ex  abitu  viri  quam  ex  adventu  volup- 
tatis  cepi.  The  phrases  *  ex  abitu  '  and  '  ex  adventu  '  would 
necessitate  the  use  of  quam  even  in  the  absence  of  the  genitives 
'aegri'  and  '  voluptatis '.  True.  69  :   Ei  plus  scortorum  esse 

iam  quam  ponderum. 

Terence. 

And.  547  :  Sed  si  ex  ea  re  plus  malist  quam  commodi.  A7id. 
720  :  .  .  .  .  facile  hie  plus  malist  quam  illic  boni.  The  adverbs 
'  hie '  and  *  illic '  would  require  quam. 


Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Genitive.  9 

Cicero. 

Brut,  70,  245  :  plus  facultatis  quam  voluntatis.  De  Or.  II, 
24,  102  :  plus  adiumenti  quam  incommodi  ;  plus  mali  quam  boni. 
De  Or.  Ill,  46,  180:  plus  utilitatis  quam   dignitatis.  Or.  62, 

210:  plus  dignitatis  quam  doloris.  hivent.  II,  35,  106:  plus 
boni  quam  mali.  R.l,  ^  :  plus  honoris  quam  laboris.  O.  I, 
83  :  plus  boni  quam  mali.  F.  1,  62  :  plus  voluptatum  quam 
dolorum.         F.   V,    93  :    plus   boni   quam    mali.  T.   II,   44  : 

laetitiae  plus  quam  molestiae.  T.  Ill,  38  :  plus  iucundi  quam 

mali.  T.  V,  103  :  plus  molestiae  quam  voluptatis.  Quint. 

II,  15.  4  :  plus  spei  quam  timoris.  Att.  XIV,  19,  4  :  plus 
timoris  quam  consilii.  Sull.  29,  81  :  plus  invidiae  quam  digni- 
tatis. Verr.  IV,  63.  141  :  plus  mali  quam  boni.  Q.  Rose. 
6,  17  :  plus  fidei  quam  artis  ;  plus  ventatis  quam  disciplinae. 
Caec.  8,  22  :  plus  animi  quam  consilii.  Marc.  8,  26  :  admira- 
tionis  plus  quam  gloriae.  Cael.  11,  27:  plus  disputationis 
quam  atrocitatis. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

IV,  36  :  plus  calamitatis  quam  boni. 

Sallust. 

Cat.  42,  2  :  plus  timoris  quam  periculi.  Jug.  31,  2  :  plus 
periculi  quam  honoris.  Jug.  42,  4  :  plusque  timoris  quam 
potentiae.  J^^^-  44.  2  :  plus  sollicitudinis  quam  auxili  aut  spei 
bonae.         Jug.  85,  40  :  plus  gloriae  quam  divitiarum. 

Cornelius  Nepos. 

Timoleon,  2,2:  plus  clementiae  quam  crudelitatis.  Attiais^ 
13,  2  :  plus  salis  quam  sumptus.  Epam.  5,  2  :  plus  virium 
quam  ingenii. 

MINUS. 

Cicero. 

Mur.  2,4:  minus  auctoritatis  quam  facultatis.  Sull.  4,  12  : 
minus  auctoritatis  quam  facultatis. 

In  a  few  cases  with  a  change  of  thought  the  nominative  appears 


lo  Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Genitive. 

after  the  *  genitive  of  the  whole  '  with  plus.  The  comparison  is 
here  made  between  the  two  nominatives  :  the  examples  border 
very  closely  on  Class  I,  but  because  they  possess  the  peculiarity 
of  form  noticed  in  this  sub-category  it  has  been  thought  prefer- 
able to  quote  them  here.  The  presence  of  the  plus  construction 
is  the  cause  of  the  appearance  of  quam. 

Plautus. 

M.  G.  236  :  neque  habet  plus  sapiential  quam  lapis. 

Cicero. 

F.  V,  88  :  nee  plus  ei  vitae  tribuo  quam  Stoici. 


Under  this  same  general  category  there  is  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  examples  where  an  adjective  takes  the  place  of  one  of  the 
genitives.  In  by  far  the  larger  part  of  the  instances,  it  will  be 
noticed,  it  is  the  first  genitive  that  is  replaced  by  an  adjective. 
The  genitive  equivalence  of  the  adjectives  is  so  obvious  that  no 
explanation  will  be  necessary. 

Cicero. 

Rab.  5,  14:  An  pietas  tua  maior  quam  C.  Gracchi?  Phil. 
V,  2,  6  :  An  potest  cognatio  propior  ulla  esse  quam  patriae. 
Balb.  19,  44 :  tamen  hoc  ipso  inferius  esse  suum  foedus  quam 
ceterorum.  Lael.  59  :  Negabat  (Scipio)  uUam  vocem  inimici- 
orem  amicitiae  potuisse  reperiri  quam  eius,  qui  ....  Att. 
VIII,  II,  3:  Atque  hoc  nostra  gravior  est  causa  ....  quam 
illorum,  qui.  Brut.  Ill,  13  :  An  mihi  potuit  esse  aut  gratior 
ulla  salutatio  aut  ad  hoc  tempus  aptior  quam  illius,  qui  .  .  .  The 
last  three  would  have  quam  even  without  the  genitive  (Cate- 
gory VI).  Both  genitive  and  ^?/2-clause  produce  the  same  result. 
F.  IV,  69  :  ista  evaserunt  deteriora  quam  Aristonis. 

In  the  following  instances  the  relative  pronoun  takes  the  place 
of  the  first  genitive. 

Cicero. 

Phil.  Ill,  10,  25  :  Quae  indicia  graviora  quam  amicorum 
suorum?         Prov.   Cons.  9,  22:  Quae  inimicitiae  graviores  quam 


Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Dative.  1 1 

I^ucuUorum  atque  Servili?  De  Or.  I,   38,   175:    Quae  causa 

maior  quam  illius  militis?  O.  Ill,  84:     quae  maior  utilitas 

quam  regnandi  .  . 

There  is  but  one  case  where  the  adjective  replaces  the  second 
genitive. 

Cicero. 

T.  II,  35  :  quorum  (Graecorum)  copiosior  lingua  quam  nostra. 


III. 


The  comparison  is  instituted  with  a  preceding  dative  ;  quam  with 
the  dative  follows.  The  comparative  adjective  may  be  in  any 
case  whatever. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  595  :  neque  tibi  istuc  mirum  magis  videtur  quam  mihi. 
Quo  modo  ?  Nilo,  inquam  mirum  magis  tibi  istuc  quam 
mihi.  Asi7i.  573 :  Ubi  amicae  quam  amico  tuo  fueris  magis 
fidelis.         Capt.'ji6'.  Quia  illi  fuisti  quam  mihi  fidelior.         Capt. 

939  : qui  mihi  melior  quam  sibi  semper  fuit.  Cas.  608  : 

Numquam  tibi  hodie  '  quin  '  erit  plus  quam  mihi.         Men.  675  : 

sibi  inimicus  magis  quam  aetati  tuae.         M.  G.  351  :  nee 

quoiquam  quam  illi  in  nostra  meliust  famulo  familia.         M.  G. 
Til  \  ...  .  dant  inde  partem  mihi  maiorem  quam  sibi. 

Terence. 

Hec.  281  :  Nemini  ego  plura  ex  amore  acerba  credo  homini 
umquam  oblata  quam  mi. 

Varro. 
L.  Z,.  X,  4  :  sic  senior  seni  similior  quam  puero. 

Cicero. 
O.  I,  44 :  Talis  .  .  .  simulatio  vanitati  est  coniunctior  quam  aut 


12  Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Dative. 

liberalitati   aut   honestati.  R.    I,    7  :    Cui   cum   liceret  .  .  .  . 

maiores  ex  otio  fructus  capere  quam  ceteris.  R.\,  62  :  Uni 
gubernatori  .  .  .  rectius  esse  .  .  .  navem  committere  .  .  .  quam 
multis.  R.    I,    frag.    2:    Maior  ei    (patriae)    profecto   quam 

parenti  debitur  gratia.  Lael.  14  :  Cui  censemus  cursum  ad  deos 
faciliorem  fuisse  quam  Scipioni?  Lael  42  :  (poena)  minor  iis 
qui  .  .  .  ,  quam  iis,  qui  ...  P.  2\  maior  est  illi  quam  nobis. 
Invefit.  II,  2,  5  :  Kx  maiore  copia  nobis  quam  illi  fuit  potestas. 
Invent.  II,  8,  26  :  sibi  mains  quam  aliis.  Or.  13,  42  :  genus 

pompae  quam    pugnae  aptius.  Brut.  44,    165  :    genus  aptius 

iudiciis  quam  contionibus.  Brut.  48,  178  :  contionibus  aptior 
quam  iudiciis.  Verr.  Ill,  39,  89  :  plus  frumenti  servo  Venerio 

quam  Populo  Romano.  Verr.  IV,  50,  112:  quae  propiora  sceleri 
quam  religioni.  Verr.  V,  19,  ^|8  :  sibi  amiciorem  quam  populo 

Romano.  Caec.  15,  42  :  maior  vis  ei  quam  illi  cuius.         Phil. 

II,  19,  47  :  notiora  vobis  quam  mihi.         Phil.  II,  23,  57  :  notiora 
omnibus  quam   mihi,   qui.         Phil.  V,  4,  11  :  sibi  felicior  quam 
viris.         Leg.  Agr.   Ill,  3,    10  :  melius  Sullanis  praediis  quam 
paternis.         Deiot.  2,4:  sibi  aequiorem  quam  reo.         Sull.  I,  3 
mihine  maiorem  dolorem  quam  Q.  Hortensio?     Pet.  Con.  4,  13 
innocenti  plus  amplitudinis  quam  ceteris  afferat.         Mur.  36,  77 
notiores  servo  tuo  quam  tibi.         Clue?it.  1,2:  concionibus  con- 
citatis    accommodatior   quam    tranquillis    moderatisque    iudiciis. 
Cluent.   32,  88  :   ruinae  similiora  aut  tempestati  quam  indicio  et 
disceptationi.        Plane.  33,  82  :  voluptati  pluribus  quam  praesidio. 
Do7n.   26,   68  :  amiciorem   vobis   ceterisque   civibus  quam    mihi. 
Verr.  I,  40,   103  :  notiora  his  quam  nobis  qui.         Piso,  31,  78  : 
aliis  me  inimiciorem  quam  tibi.  Piso,   32,   80  :    sibi  amicior 

quam  mihi.  Cael.    2,    5  :    Nemini   maiores  honores  quam   M. 

Caelio.  Balb.  4,  9  :  plus  homini  quam  deae.  Balb.  7,  18  : 
gravior  L.  Cornelio  quam  multis  viris.  Balb.  23,  54  :  accusa- 
tori  maiora  praemia  quam  bellatori.  Prov.  Cons.  8,  18  :  inimi- 
ciorem Gabinio  quam  Caesari.  Att.  I,  20,  2  :  rei  publicae 
utilior  quam  mihi.  Att.  V,  18,  4  :  cui  difficilius  est  quam  ipsi. 
Att.  VII,  1,6:  amicior  aerariis  quam  nostro.  Att.  IX,  5,  2  : 
amicior  huic  quam  ipsi  Caesari.         Att.  IX,  15,  5  :  mihi  inimici- 


Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Dative.  13 

orem  quam  sibi.  Att.  X,  8a,  i  :  quibus  dignitas  carior  quam 
tibi  ipsi.  Att.  XII,  37,  3  :  tibi  maiori  curae  quam  mihi.  Att. 
XII,  52,  I  :  res  tibi  notior  quam  mihi.  Att.  XIII,  23,  3:  mihi 
maiori  offensioni  quam  delectationi.  Att.  XV,  2,1:  tibi  maiori 
curae  quam  mihi.  Att.  XVI,  1,1:  turpius  quam  Brute  Juliis? 
Att.  XVI,  2,  3:  maiorem  Accio  quam  Antonio  gratiam.  Att. 
XVI,  6,  3  :  tibi  maiori  curae  quam  ipsi  mihi.  Fam.  I,  5,  4  : 

maiori  illis  fraudi  quam  tibi.  Fam.  II,  6,  5  :  plus  tibi  quam 
ipsi  Miloni.  Fam.  VI,  1,7:  cui  plus  quam  tibi.  Fam.  VII, 
18,  I  :  tibi  maiori  curae  quam  mihi.  Fam.  X,  33,  2  :  mihi 
maior  quam  Planco.  Fam.  XII,  17,  i  :  tibi  propiora  quam 
nobis.  Fam.  XIII,  18,  i  :  nostro  Attico  iucundiores  quam 
mihi.  Quint.  I,  3,  10 :  tibi  minorem  dolorem  quam  mihi. 
Quint.  Ill,  4,  4  :  tibi  priores  partes  quam  mihi. 

Nepos. 

MiltiadeSy  3,  6  :  amicior  libertati  quam  suae  dominationi. 

Sallust. 

Cat.  52,  21  :  maior  nobis  copia  quam  illis. 

To  this  rule  there  is  but  one  exception — Plant.  Aul.  810. 
Quis.  me  Athenis  nunc  magis  quisquamst  homo,  quoi  di  sunt 
propitii  ? 

Here  we  should  expect  quam  mihi  instead  of  me.  It  is  the 
second  member  of  a  comparison  instituted  with  cui.  The 
explanation  probably  lies  in  the  two  following  circumstances, 
(i)  The  previous  sentence  reads  Quis  mest  divitior"^.  vSO  that  me 
may  be  a  mere  reminiscence  ;  (2)  But  far  stronger  than  this  is 
the  fact  that  here  we  have  a  rhetorical  question  and  such  ques- 
tions, as  will  be  shown  later,  almost  invariably  take  the  ablative 
rather  than  the  quam  construction  (Category  XVI). 


14  Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative. 

IV. 

The  comparison  is  instituted  with  an  accusative  : 

A. 

If  the  comparative  is  in  an  oblique  case  other  than  the  ac- 
cusative the  rules  already  given  under  I,  II,  III,  hold  ;  i.  e.,  we 
have  quam  followed  by  the  accusative. 

Cicero. 

Phil.  XII,  3,  8  :  se  graviore  odio  quam  senatum.  Fam.  VI, 
2,  I  :  tuas  res  minori  curae  quam  meas.  Fam.  VI,  3,  4  :  te 
maiore  in  discrimine  quam  quemvis.  R.  I,  20  :  quem  raaioribus 
de  rebus  quam  me. 

B. 

When  the  comparison  is  effected  by  a  comparative  in  the 
accusative  case, 

(i)  If  the  accusative  that  institutes  the  comparison  is  the  sub- 
ject of  an  infinitive, 

(«)  In  an  affirmative  sentence,  it  will  be  followed  by  quam  + 
another  accusative.  This  holds  especially  when  the  comparative 
is  formed  with  the  suffix — ior,  ius  (for  magis  see  Category  IX). 

Plautus. 

Men.  970:  Tergum  quam  gulam,  crura  quam  ventrem  oportet 
potiora  esse.         Rud.  751  :  probiorem  hanc  esse  quam  te. 

Cicero. 

T.  II,  28  :  mains  esse  malum  mediocrem  dolorem  quam  maxi- 
mum dedecus.  T.  II,  28  :  mains  videri  malum  dedecus  quam 
dolorem.  T.  IV,  61  :  eventus  humanos  superiores  quam  suos 
animos  esse.  R.  I,  28  :  plus  egisse  Dionysium  quam  Archi- 
medem.  A.  II,  82  :  quem  maiorem  esse  quam  terram.  A. 
II,  116  :  solem  maiorem  esse  quam  terram.  A.  II,  128  :  solem 
maiorem  esse  quam  terram.  D.  II,  78  :  antiquiorem  fuisse 
laudem  et  gloriam  quam  regnum.  N.  II,  47  :    cylindrum  et 


Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative.  15 

pyramidem   pulchriorem   qiiara   sphaeram   videri.  F.  I,   10  : 

Latinam  linguam  locupletiorem  esse  quam  Graecam.  F,  III, 
64  :  cariorera  esse  patriam  quam  nosmet  ipsos.  F,  IV,  65  :  Ti. 
Gracchum  patrem  beatiorem  fuisse  quam  filium.  F.  V,  96  : 
hanc  acutiorem  quam  ceteras.  L.  I,  52  :  melius  esse  aliquid 
quam  virtutem.  Brut.  41,  151  :  quem  plus  studi  quam  ilium 
adhibuisse.  De  Or.  I,  10,  43  :  plura  Aristotelem  Theophras- 
tumque  quam  omnes  magistros.  Plane,    12,    30 :    iuferiorem 

quam  te.  Q.  Rose.  6,  17  :  quem  meliorem  virum  quam  histri- 
onem  esse.  Verr.  Ill,  3,  6  :  maiores  ullas  inimicitias  esse  con- 

trarias  sententias.  Flaee.  30,  74 :  te  superiorem  esse  quam 
Laelium.  Phil.   VIII,    i,   3  :    gravius   tumultum   esse   quam 

bellum.  Phil.  XIII,  10,  23  :  cariorem  filium  quam  C.  Caesarem 
videri.  Vat.  Test.  17,  41  :  quem  unum  improbiorem  esse  quam 

te.  Att.  IX,  2a,  2  :  me  plus  vidisse  quam  se.  Fam.  IX,  i, 
2  :  teque  sapientiorem  quam  me  fuisse.  Fam.  XIV,  7,2:  vos 
fortiores   quam   quemquam.  Quint.    I,    i,    11,    33:    leniores 

Graecos  quam  nostros  publicanos.  Quint.  I,  1,6,  18  :  quem 
esse  iuferiorem  quam  me.  Quint.  I,  2,  2,  5  :  quem  nobiliorem 
esse  quam  civitatem  suam.  Quint.  II,  8,  4  :  meliorem  civem 
esse  quam  Pliiloctetem.  De  hivent.  II,  36,  108  :  leviora  bene- 
ficia  quam  maleficia.  Plane.  34,  84  :  severiorem  Nicaeam  quam 
Rhodum  (esse). 

Sallust. 

Cat.  51,  15  :  omnes  cruciatus  minores  quam  facinora. 

To  this  principle  there  are  but  four  exceptions,  viz : 

Varro. 
L.  L.  IX,  13  :  potiorem  esse  consuetudinem  ratione. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 
Ill,  5  :  antiquiorera  mortem  turpitudine  haberi. 

Cicero. 
N.  Ill,  18  :  esse  aliquid  homine  melius. 


i6  Comparison  Instihited  with  an  Accusative. 

Caesar. 

B.  C.  I,  9,  2  :  fuisse  dignitatem  vitaque  potiorem. 

There  are  some  instances  in  which  the  comparative  idea  is 
found  in  an  adjective  to  which  the  accusative  with  the  infinitive 
is  a  predicate. 

Plautus. 

Asin.  819:  me  honestiust  quam  te  palam  hanc  rem  facere. 
Cist.  500  :  te  aliquanto  facilius  quam  me  meamque  rem  perire. 

Cicero. 

Lig.  12,  38  :  utilius  esse  arbitrer  te  ipsum  quam  me  aut  quem- 
quam  loqui  tecum.  Imp.  Pomp,  i,  3:  diflScilius  est  exitura 
quam  principium  invenire. 

b)  In  negative  sentences^  under  the  same  conditions  the  abla- 
tive regularly,  tho  not  invariably,  appears  in  place  of  quam  -f  the 
accusative.  In  sentences  of  nearly  the  same  type  we  find  the  two 
constructions  existing  side  by  side.  It  will  be  noticed  that  when 
we  have  the  ablative,  in  nearly  every  case  it  precedes  the  com- 
parative, while  quam  and  its  construction  follows. 

Plautus. 

Aid.  561  f.  :  Quo  quidem  agno  sat  scio  magis  curionem  nus- 
quam  esse  ullam  beluam.  Cas.  244  :  Te  sene  omnium  senum 
neminem  esse  ignaviorem. 

Terence. 

Hec.  566  :  nullam  pol  credo  mulierem  me  miseriorem  vivere. 

Eun.  199  :  hoc  certe  scio neque  meo  cordi  esse 

quemquara  cariorem  hoc  Phaedria. 

Cicero. 

D.  I,  59  :  nihil  somnio  fieri  posse  divinius.  D.  I,  79  :  nihil 
illo  puero  clarius,    nihil  nobilius  fore.         D.   II,  66  :  nihil  illo 


'  In  using  the  term  '  negative'  here,  'universal  negative'  {e.g.  numquant, 
nusguam)  is  to  be  understood.  '  Affirmative  '  in  the  preceding  subsection  is 
so  paradoxical  as  to  include  negatives  like  non,  neque. 


Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative.  1 7 

clarius,  nihil  nobilius  fore.  D.  II,  69  :  negant  ullum  ostentum 
hoc  tristius  accidisse.  N.  I,  24  :  ea  forma  negat  iillam  esse 
pulchriorem.  N.  I,  37  :  nihil  ratione  esse  divinius.  N.  I, 
76  :  nee  esse  hiimana  (forma)  iillum  pulchriorem.  i?.  I,  49  : 
concordi  populo  nihil  esse  immutabilins,  nihil  firmiiis.  R.  I, 
55  :  libertate  ne  feris  quidem  quicquam  esse  dulcius.  R.  I,  56  : 
nihil  esse  rege  melius.  A.  II,  17  :  orationem  nullam  illustri- 
orem  ipsa  evidentia  reperiri  posse.  P.  21  \  nee  bono  viro 
meliorem  nee  temperante  temperantiorera  nee  forte  fortiorem 
posse   fieri  potest.  T.  II,   14  :    peius  quicquam  videri  dede- 

core  flagitio  turpitudine  ?  The  context  shows  that  the  content 
of  the  sentence  is  negative.  O.  Ill,  117:  nihil  isto  esse  iu- 
cundius.  F.  I,  40 :  quern  hoc  statu  praestabiliorem.  F.  I, 
65  :  nihil  esse  mains  amicitia.  L.  II,  7  :  cave  .  .  putes  Amal- 
thio  quicquam  esse  praeclarius.  Here  we  should  be  justified  in 
expecting  a  quam  because  of  the  presence  of  the  subjunctive 
putes.  (See  Category  XI.)  Brut.  38,  143:  Crasso  nihil  fieri 
potuisse  perfectius.  Brut.  40,  148  :  his  duobus  quidquam  fuisse 
praestantius.  Brut.  86,  295  :  oratione  negas  fieri  quidquam  posse 
dulcius.  De  Or.  II,  8,  33  :  nihil  esse  oratore  praeclarius. 
De  Or.  II,  48,  199  :  nullam  ilia  causa  iustiorem  fuisse.  Invent. 
n,  48,  143  :  legibus  antiquius  haberi  nihil  oportere.  Or.  7,  23  : 
quo  ne  Athenas  quidem  ipsas  magis  credo  fuisse  Atticas.  This 
sentence  is  classified  here  because  in  content  it  is  really  equal  to 
quo  nihil  magis  credo  fuisse  Attictim.  Sest.  10,  23  :  nihil  esse 
praestantius  otiosa  vita.  Opt.  Gen.  Or,  6,  17  :  nihil  illo  oratore 
cogitari  posse  divinius.  Att.  II,  9,  i  :  nihil  hoc  posse  iucun- 
dius.  Att.  II,  22,  2  :  nihil  antiquius  amicitia  nostra  fuisse. 
Att.  V,  I,  5  :  nihil  te  nee  carius  esse  nee  suavius.  Att.  V,  14, 
3  :  quo  mihi  nihil  esse  carius.  Att.  V  21,  12  :  nihil  impu- 
dentius  Scaptio,  qui.  Here  we  should  expect  to  find  quam 
Scaptius,  qui.  (See  Category  VI.)  Att.  IX,  16,  3  :  Dolabella 
tuo  nihil  scito  mihi  esse  iucundius.  Aft.  X,  8a,  i  :  neminem 
esse  cariorem  te.  Att.  XII,  9  :  cetera  amabiliora  fieri  posse 
villa,  litore,  prospectu  maria.  Att.  XIV,  17a,  4  :  libero  lectulo 
neget  esse  quidquam  iucundius,  despite  the  subjunctive    (Cate- 


1 8  Comparison  Instituted  wtth  an  Accusative. 

gory  XI).  Fam.  II,  6,  4 :  te  maioris  animi  gravitatis  habi- 
turum  esse   neminem.  Fam.    II,   3,    2  :    te   neque   cariorem 

neque  iucundiorem  esse  quemquam.  Fam.  V,  lob  :  neminem 
te  tui  amantiorem  habere.  Fam.  V,  13,  2  :  nihil  esse  potuisse 
tuis  litteris  gratius.  Fam.  VII,  16,  3  :  neminem  te  iino  periti- 
orem  esse.  Fam.  X,  31,  5  :  hac  legione  noli  acrius  aut  pugna- 
cius  quidquam  putare  esse.  Fam.  XVI,  12,  2  :  nihil  esse  bello 
civili  miserius. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  22,2:  neque  mains  quicquam  nee  carius  auctoritate  senati 
esse.  Here  the  ablative  appears  despite  the  fact  that  it  is  modi- 
fied by  a  genitive  of  a  noun.     (See  Category  VI.) 

The  accusative  with  quam  occurs  in  the  following  : 

Cicero. 

Lael.  91  :  nullam  pestem  esse  maiorem  quam  adulationem. 
F.  IV,  3  :  nihil  esse  melius  quam  se. 

To  these  will  be  added  several  examples  that  might  be  placed 
under  the  category  of  nouns  modified  by  genitives.  (See  Cate- 
gory VI.)  If  they  were  transferred  from  this  class,  we  should 
have  a  large  majority  of  instances  in  favor  of  the  ablative,  which 
theoretically  is  what  one  would  expect  in  universal  negative  sen- 
tences. The  current  in  this  type  of  sentence  sets  very  strongly 
towards  the  ablative  as  we  shall  presently  see. 

Cicero. 

O.  Ill,  34  :  negat  ullam  pestem  maiorem  invasisse  quam  eorum 
opinionem.  C.  39  :  nullam  capitaliorem  pestem  quam  volupta- 
tem  corporis.  Verr.  V,   36,   95  :    nihil  esse  pulchrius  quam 

Syracusarum  moenia. 

A  couple  of  instances  occur  in  Cicero  where  we  have  the 
sentence  negatived  by  an  ablative  of  degree  {nihilo),  after  which 
quam  regularly  appears,  as  will  be  seen  (Category  X).  F. 
IV,  63 :  homines  sceleribus  inquinatos  nihilo  miseriores  esse 
quam  eos.  F.  V,  83  :  nihilo  beatiorem  esse  Metellum  quam 
Regulum. 


Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative.  19 

From  these  examples  it  will  be  seen  that  the  ablative  is  the 
regular  construction  in  this  sub-category.  There  are  forty-six 
instances  where  it  occurs — two  others  have  quam  for  no  apparent 
reason  ;  five  can  be  otherwise  explained. 

(2)  The  accusative  that  institutes  the  comparison  is  not  the 
subject  of  an  infinitive  but  is  the  simple  object  of  a  verb. 

(a)  In  an  affirmative  sentence  the  comparative  is,  in  all  writers 
except  Plautus,  followed  indifferently  by  quam  -f  another  accusa- 
tive, or  by  an  ablative.  In  this  form  of  expression  Plautus  is  a  law 
unto  himself,  for  in  no  other  author  do  we  find  these  accusatives 
followed  by  quam,  +  the  nominative  with  some  form  of  the  verb 
esse  expressed  or  understood.  This  is  Plautus' s  almost  unvarying 
rule.  He  employs  the  ablative  but  once  in  sentences  of  this 
character. 

a.   Quam  with  the  accusative  is  found  as  follows  : 

Plautus. 

M.  G.  1354  :  alios  fideliores  habuisti  quam  me.  Stick.  97  : 
aequiust  nos  potiorem  habere  quam  te  ? 

Afranius. 

Thais,  II:  maiorem  laudem  quam  laborem  invenero.  (Rib- 
beck,  vol.  II,  p.  248,  1.  334.) 

Cicero. 

O.  II,  25  :  fideliorem  et  barbarum  et  stigmatiam  putaret  quam 
coniugem.  O.  Ill,  105  :  quern  locupletiorem  quaerimus  quam 
principem.  De  Opt.  Gen.  Or.  26  :  acutiorem  se  quam  ornati- 
orem  velit.^  Ep.  ad  Brut.  I,  7,  i  :  neque  digniorem  nominare 
potes  quam   Bibulum.  Fam.   XII,    15,   3  :    omnes   firmiores 

putarent  quam  bonos.  Fam.   V,    13,   3  :  fortiorem  me  puto 

quam  te  ipsum.  Fam.  VIII,  3,  i  :  dissimulare  me  certiorem 
quam  se  candidatum.  Phil.  Frag.  V,  44 :  vidi  Posidonium 
quam  Nicomachum  fortiorem. 

^  One  of  the  very  few  examples  in  which  we  find  the  double  comparative, 
the  many  grammars  give  the  rule  :  '  If  the  first  of  two  adjectives  between 
which  a  comparison  is  drawn  is  in  the  comparative  degree,  the  second  must 
also  be  comparative  '.     See  Fam,.  XII,  15,  3,  above. 


20  Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative. 

p.  There  are  as  many  examples  where  the  ablative  appears. 

Plautus. 

Poe?t.  1236  :  hanc  canem  faciam  oleo  tranquilliorem. 

Lucretius. 

IV,  1231  :  eius  habet  plus  parte  aequa. 

Cicero. 

T.  IV,  57  :  humana  omnia  inferiora  virtute  ducat.  Here  the 
subjunctive  rule,  to  which  reference  will  be  made  later  (Category 
XI)  is  violated.  Dom.  18,  47  :  hanc  legem  scripsit  spurciorem 
lingua  sua.  R.  I,  28  :  omnia  humana  et  inferiora  sapientia  du- 
centem.  TV.  21  :  virtute  antiquiorem  genuit  animum.  Ba/d.ij, 
39  :  speciem  omni  sanctiorem  ara  duxerunt.  P/iit.  XIII,  6  :  haec 
libertate  posteriora  ducas,  despite  the  subjunctive  (Category 
XI).  Lael.  7  :  humanos  casus  virtute  inferioris  putes.  Fam. 
VII,  24,  I  :  hominem  pestilentiorem  patria  sua.  Fam.  X, 
34,  4  :  plura  tuo  merito  debeo.  Pam.  XI,  6,  i  :  quam  habeo 
tua  cariorem.  Att.  VIII,  11  D,  7  :  ea  bello  civili  leviora  duce- 
bam.         Or.  2,8:  iis  picturiis  pulchriora.  ^ 

Caesar. 

B.  C.  I,  8,  3  :  rei  publicae  commoda  privatis  necessitudinibus 
habuisse  potiora.  B.  G.  VII,  19,  5  :  vitam  sua  salute  habeat 
cariorem. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  26,  2  :  omnia  potiora  fide  Jugurthae  rebatur.  Here  the 
genitive  that  modifies  fides  does  not  keep  it  from  appearing  in  the 
ablative  case  (Category  VI).  Jug.  14,  15  :  morte  graviorem 
vitam  exigunt. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  eight  out  of  the  fourteen  examples  placed 
in  this  category  involve  verbs  of  considering  or  regardi?tg. 

y.  The  examples  that  appear  in  Plautus  where  this  accusative 
occurs  are  followed  by  quam  +  a  nominative. 

Aul.  401  :  tu  istum  gallum,  si  sapis,  glabriorem  reddes  mihi 
quam  volsus  ludiust.         Stick.  109  :  Facile  invenies  et  priorem  et 


Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative.  21 

peius  moratam  quam  ilia  fuit.  The  comparative  adverb  may  here 
be  the  cause  of  the  appearance  of  the  quam.  There  is  also  a 
further  consideration  that  would  tend  to  produce  the  form  we 
have.  Antipho's  wife  has  been  dead  for  some  time  and  in  refer- 
ring to  her  a  past  tense  would  naturally  be  used.  When  a  differ- 
ence in  tense  has  to  be  indicated,  of  course,  quam  is  essential. 
The  sentence  then  approaches  very  near  the  type  which  we 
postulated  as  outside  the  scope  of  this  discussion.  But  there  is 
no  outside  influence  to  determine  the  form  of  the  following: 
True.  627  :  istam  machaeram  longiorem  habes  quam  haec  est. 
As  will  be  seen  later,  Plautus  shows  the  same  peculiarity  in  nega- 
tive sentences. 

b)  In  a  negative  sentence  the  comparative  is  usually  followed 
by  the  ablative,  unless  the  accusative  which  the  comparative 
modifies  is  neminem,  when  the  construction  with  quam  is  common. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  279  :  Neque  ego  hac  nocte  longiorem  me  vidisse. 
Pseud.  938  :  Neque  ego  hoc  homine  quidquam  vidi  magis  malum. 
Stick,  368  :  quo  ego  me  maiorem  non  vidisse  censeo. 

Terence. 
Hec.  462  :  tu  nil  attulisti  plus  una  hac  sententia  ? 

Varro. 
R.  R.l,  2,  2>''  ecquam  cultiorem  Italia? 

Cicero. 

Lael.  47:  qua  nihil  melius,  nihil  iucundius.  Lael.  104:  nihil 
amicitia  praestabilius  putetis.  C.  40  :  nihil  mente  praestabilius 
dedisset.  F.  Ill,  16  :  quod  hoc  divinius?  O.  II,  28:  si  hoc 
uno  quicquam  sol  vidisset  indignius.  O.   Ill,  44  :  qua  nihil 

dedit  divinius.  R.l,  16  :  Quern  auctorem  locupletiorem  Platone 
laudari  .  .  .  ?  The  rhetorical  question  is  in  content  equal  to  a 
negative  statement.  (Category  XV.)  O.  Ill,  no:  hoc  ex- 
emplo  aut  laudabilius  aut  praestantius  (quicquam).  T.  II,  25  : 

quo  dedecus  mains  nullum  expecto.         T.  Ill,  3  :  nihil  praestan- 


22  Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative. 

tius  honoribus,  imperius  populari  gloria  iudicaverunt.  T.  V, 
64  :  qua  taetrius  miserius  detestabilius  excogitare  nihil.  R.  I, 
60  :  nihil  isto  animo,  nihil  animato  homine  miserius  ducerem. 
N.  II,  160:  qua  pecude  nihil  genuit  natura  fecundius.  Z?.  I, 
122:  quo  quern  auctorem  meliorem  quaerimus?  D.  II,  116: 
Herodotum  cur  veraciorem  ducam  Ennio  ?  These  two  sentences 
are  in  content  like  the  other  instances  included  in  this  category. 
In  the  last  one,  for  example,  the  answer  would  be  nulla  causa  est 
cur.  Verr.  IV,  43,  94  :  quo  non  facile  dixerim  quicquam  me 

vidisse  pulchrius.  Or.  2,8:  quibus  nihil  perfectius  videmus. 
Sex.  Rose.  12,  33  :  quo  nihil  vidit  indignius.  Phil.  Ill,  12,  31  : 
quo  neminera  sui  similiorem.  Phil.  XIV,  10,  27  :  qua  nullius 
pulchriorem  speciem  imperatoris  accepimus.  Fam.  V,  5,  3  : 
hoc  mihi  nihil  gratius  facere  potes.  This  same  sentence  occurs 
also  in  Fam.  VI,  9,  2  ;  XII,  23,  4  ;  XII,  29,  4  ;  XIII,  44  ;  XIII, 
66,  2;  XIII,  74;  XIII,  79;  XVI,  22,  2;  Att.  II,  I,  12.  Fam, 
X,  35,  I  :  nihil  antiquius  communi  salute  ac  libertate  iudicarim. 
Fam.  XI,  27,  4  :  Quern  te  amiciorem  iudicaverunt.         Att.  I,  12, 

1  :  nihil  ilia  impudentius  astutius  lentius  vidi.         Att.  XII,  29, 

2  :  nihil  reperio  isto  loco  aptius.  Att.  XV,  21,1:  Ecquem  tu 
illo  certiorem  nebulonem  ?  Ad  Quint.  I,  i,  15,  43:  nihil 
amplius  desiderarem  hoc  statu,  qui.  Ad  Brut.  I,  15,  9  :  nihil 
hoc  bello  sensisse  prudentius. 

Nepos. 

Atticus,  15,  2  :  qua  nihil  habebat  carius. 

Tho  not  expressly  universal  negatives,  the  thought  that  per- 
vades at  least  two  examples  is  such  as  to  bring  them  under  this 

category,  viz  : 

Plautus. 

M.  G.  21  :  Periuriorem  hoc  hominem  si  quis  viderit. 

Cicero. 

O.  Ill,  26  :  errat  in  eo,  quod  ullum  aut  corporis  aut  fortunae 
vitium,  vitiis  animi  gravius  existimarunt. 

There  are  three  instances  where  the  Plautine  peculiarity  of  fol- 
lowing the  comparatives  with  guam  +  a  nominative  is  manifested. 


Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Accusative.  23 

M.   G.  803  :    noti  potuit  reperire  lepidiores  duas  ad  banc  rem 

qiiam   ego.         Pseud.    1017  :    Peiorem  ego   hominem  magisque 

vorsute  malum  numquam  edepol  qiiemquam  vidi  quam  hie  est 

Simla.         Stick.  343  :  Verum  ex  multis  uequiorem  nullam  quam 

hie  est. 

The  negative  sentences  that  show  the  accusative  by  exception 

are  : 

Plautus. 

Bacch.  256  :  Scelestiorem  nullum  inluxere  alterum.     Quamve 

Archidemidem  ?     Quam,  inquam,  Archidemidem.         Most.  607  : 

neque   ego   taetriorem   beluam   vidisse   me  umquam  quemquam 

quam  te  censeo. 

Terence. 

Hec.  750  :  si  aliud  scirem  sanctius  quam  iusiurandum. 

Cicero. 

T.   II,  46  :  nihil  habet  praestantius  quam   honestatem  quam 

laudem  quam  dignitatem  quam  decus.         Quinct.  3,   11:  natura 

nihil  melius  quam  vocem  dedisset,  due  perhaps  to  the  presence 

of   the  subjunctive  (Category  XI).         Ad  Brut.  II,  5,  6:  dis- 

ciplinam  meliorem  reperiet  nullam  quam  contemplationem  atque 

imitationem  tui.     Here  the  quam  is  no  doubt  due  to  the  genitive 

of  the  pronoun  modifying  the  second  element  of  the  comparison 

(Category  VI,  B). 

Sallust. 

Cat.  47,  I  :  nihil  amplius  scire  quam  legatos. 

The  examples  containing  neminem  are  so  consistent  that  it  has 
been  thought  advisable  to  class  them  by  themselves. 

Plautus. 

Cas.  520  :  miseriorem  quam  te  vidi  neminem.  Merc.  141  : 
Hominem  ego  iracundiorem  quam  te  novi  neminem.  Ut  ego 
maledictiorem  quam  te  novi  neminem.  Pers.  209  :  puerum 
peiorem  quam  te  novi  neminem. 

Terence. 

Phorm.  591  :  Ego  hominem  callidiorem  vidi  neminem  quam 
Phormionem . 


24  Comparison  Instituted  with  an  Ablative. 

This  is  the  first  instance  where  quam  +  the  accusative  does  not 
immediately  precede  the  verb.  The  order  in  all  the  Plautus 
quotations  is  identical.  The  two  examples  that  follow  exhibit 
a  still  different  order  : 

Cicero. 

Fam.  IX,  14,  6 :  neminem  habeo  clariorem  quam  te  ipsum. 
This  sentence  is  repeated  in  Att.  XIV,  17a,  6. 

Against  these  eight  instances  where  quam  +  the  accusative  is 
found  with  neminem,  there  are  two  where  the  ablative  occurs. 

Cicero. 

Fam.  Ill,  5,  I  :  quo  hominem  neminem  potuisti  nee  mihi 
amiciorem  nee  aptiorem  prudentioremve  mittere.  Phil.  XI,  5, 
12  :  quo  neminem  veterani  peius  oderunt.  Here  the  ablative 
occurs  even  after  an  adverb  (Category  XXI). 


v. 

The  comparison  is  instituted  with  an  ablative  ;  quam  and  the 
ablative  follows. 

Plautus. 

True.  948  :  Meliust  te  minis  certare  mecum  quam  minaciis. 

Terence. 

AdeL  57  :  Pudore  et  libertate  liberos  retinere  satius  esse  credo 
quam  metu. 

Varro. 

R.  R.  1,  ly,  2  :  utilius  mercenariis  colere  quam  servis. 

Cicero. 

Fam.  VI,  6,  13 :  Minore  desiderio  perdita  republica  carere 
quam  bona.  Fam.  IX,  18,  4:  satius  crudelitate  quam  fame. 
Att.  XIV,  17,  6  :  minore  periculo,  vivo  tyranno  quam  mortuo. 
Scaur.  3,  3:  verbis  ornatiora  quam  rebus.  Phil.  VIII,  1,1: 
oratione  quam   sententia   lenior.  Mil.    13,    34 :    suffragatore 

meliore  quam  Clodio.         Sull.  32,  90  :  vivendo  fructum  maiorem 


Comparison  histituted  with  an  Ablative.  25 

quam  audiendo.  R.  Ill,  frag.  4  :  vitiis  quam  nomine  ipso  de- 
formior,  O.  I,  13:  maiora  studia  gerentibus  quam  quietis. 
O.  II,  16  :  plures  impetu  quam  omni  reliqua  calamitate.  N.  I, 
120:  patria  Democriti  quam  Democrito  digniora.  D.  II,  87  : 
nusquam  se  fortunatiorem  quam  Praeneste.  Here  a  locative 
forms  the  second  part  of  the  comparison  that  is  instituted  with  an 
adverb  of  place,   nusquam.  De  Or.  II,  42,    178  :  Plura  odio 

quam  veritate.  Pari.  Or.  27,  97  :  sententiis  ornatior  quam 
verbis.  F.  I,  2  :  iustioribus  utamur  illis  quam  his.  F.  II, 
88  :  infinito  tempore  voluptatem  maiorem  quam  finito.  F.  II, 
108  :    animo   maiores   quam   corpore.  Phil.    Frag.    VI,    14 : 

maiora  re  quam  fama. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

II,  36  :  verius  temeritate  quam  fortuna. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  16,  5  :  specie  quam  usu  potiorem.  Jug.  44,  i  :  lingua 
quam  manu  promptior.  Jug.  99,  3  :  pluresque  eo  proelio  quam 
omnibus  superioribus.  Or.  Pomp,  ad  Sen.,  4:  maiore  studio 
quam  consilio. 

Nepos. 

Hamilcar  2,4:  plures  fame  quam  ferro. 

The  reason  for  the  use  of  qua^n  in  all  the  foregoing  instances 
with  the  oblique  cases  (pp.  6-25)  is  the  desire  to  avoid  ambig- 
uity. Especially  is  this  true  with  the  ablatives.  If  we  had  such 
a  sentence  as  utor  vestibus  pretiosioribus  cibis  we  should  be  at  a  loss 
to  know  what  construction  to  put  upon  it.  Would  it  be  quam  cibi 
su7it  or  quam  Gaius  utitur,  with  cibis  as  a  second  ablative  parallel 
to  vestibus}  Perspicuity  is  one  of  the  most  patent  of  all  the 
characteristics  of  Latin  style.  ^ 


See     Haase,     Vorlesungen    iiber    lateinische    Sprachwissenschaft,     II, 
p.  182  f. 


26  Terms  of  Comparison  Modified. 


VI. 


One  or  other  of  the  nouns  that  form  the  terms  of  the  comparison 
is  modified :  we  then  find  quam  with  the  same  case  as  precedes. 

A. 

The  modifier  is  a  clause.  Here  will  be  classed  several  examples 
that  might  have  been  introduced  under  previous  categories  ;  they 
are  more  appropriately  placed  here  I  believe. 

Plautus. 

Rud.  6i8  :  impiorum  potior  sit  poUentia     quam  innocentium, 

qui.         Men.  192  :  superior  quam  quisquam,  qui  .  .  .         Merc. 

446  :  senex  insanior  quam  ille  adulescens,  qui  .  .  .         Poen.  586  : 

doctiores  qui  .  .  .  quam  hi  sunt,  qui  .  .  .         Poen.   1290:  atrior 

quam  Aegyptini,  qui  ....  Pseud.  281  :  facilius  quam  illud, 

quod  .  .         Pseud.   792  :  peiorem  coquom  quam  hunc,  quem  .  . 

Trin.  346  :  pluris  quam  id,  quod  .  .  Trin.  199  :  Nil  stultius 

neque  stolidius  neque  mendaciloquius  neque  argutum  magis  neque 

confidentiloquius   neque    peiiurius   quam    urbani   adsidui   cives, 

quos  .  .  . 

Terence. 

Adel.  29  :  ea  satius  est  .  .  .  quam  ilia,  quae  .  . 

Varro. 

R.  R.  I,  6,  6  :  locus  is  melior  quam  is,  qui  ...  R.  R.  1,  17, 
4  :    aetate   maiore   quam   operarios,    quos.  R.  R.  I,   38,   2  : 

minoris  quam  ii,  quibus.         R.  R.ll,  2,  2:  melior  aetas  quam 
ea,  quam.         L.  L.  V,  158  :  id  antiquius  quam  aedis  quae. 

Cicero. 

Att.  VIII,  2,  4  :  locupletior  auctorquam  Socrates,  qui.  Att. 
XI,  15,  2  :  faciliora  quam  peccati  dolor,  qui.  Att.  XII,  18,  i  : 
nee  quidquam  tolerabilius  quam  solitudinem,  quam.  Att.  X^LI, 
28,  2  :  nonnuUa  meliora  quam  ea  quae.  Att.  XIII,  29,  2  : 
nihil  aptius  quam  lucus,  quem.     Fam.   Ill,  9,   2  :  plures  quam 


Terms  of  Compariso7i  Modified.  27 

ceteri,  quos.  Fa7n.  Ill,  10,  9  :  quid  utilius,  quid  aptius  quam 
hominis  coniunctio,  cuius.  Fam.  Ill,  13,  i  :  haec  ampliora 
quam  ilia  ipsa,  propter  quae.  Fam.  V,  21,  i  :  solitudinem  iu- 
cundiorem  quam  serraones  eorum,  qui.  Fam.  VIII,  15,  i  : 
hominem  ineptiorem  quam  Pompeium,  qui.  Fam.  XIV,  3,  i  : 
miserior  quam  tu,  quae.  Fam.  XV,  6,  i  :  nihil  laudabilius 
quam  oratio  quae.  Qui7it.  Ill,  6,  2  :  inferiores  quam  illorum 
aetas,  qui.  Ep.  ad  Brut.  I,  3,  3  :  digniores  quam  eos  cives, 
qui.  Invent.  II,  25,  75  :  honestius,  utilius,  magis  necessarium 
illud  quam  illud  quod.  Or.  26,  91  :  uberius  aliud  quam  hoc 
humile,  de  quo  ;  summissius  quam  illud  de  quo.  Or.  31,  112  : 
quam  nos,  qui  .  .  .  ,  notiora.  Or.  43,  146  :  plus  quam  ea,  de 
quibus  .  .  Or.  71,  237:  quidquam  firmius  quam  id  quodcum- 
que.         R.  I,  28  :  divitiorem  quemquam  quam  eum,  qui.         R. 

I,  28  :  potentiorem  quam  ilium,  qui.  R.  I,  51  :  deformior 
species  quam  ilia  in  qua.  R.  I,  Frag.  2  :  beneficia  plura  quam 
is,  qui.  R.  I,  Frag.  2  :  antiquior  parens  quam  is  qui.  De 
Or.  I,  37,  169  :  Quid  turpius  quam  eum,  qui  .  .  De  Or.  II, 
53,  212  :  temperatior  oratio  quam  ilia  in  qua.  P.  3  :  audacius 
quam  ille  ipse,  de  quo.  N.  I,  78  :  pulchriorem  me  quam  ille, 
qui.  N.  II,  21  :  omnia  meliora  quam  ea,  quae.  N.  II,  46  : 
id  melius  quam  id,  quod.  N.  II,  87  :  meliora  ea  quam  ilia 
quae.  N.  Ill,  13  :  certiora  quam  ilia,  quae.  D.  II,  51  : 
insipientior  quam  illi  ipsi,  qui.  O.  I,  41  :  nulla  capitalior 
quam  eorum  qui.  O.  I,  57  :  nulla  gravior,  nulla  carior  quam 
ea,  quae.  O.  II,  46  :  res  gratiores  quam  illae,  quas.  O.  II, 
79  :  plures  ii  quam  illi,  quibus.  Phil.  V,  2,  3  :  Neminem 
aequiorem  quam  me,  cui.  Phil.  XI,  4,  8  :  Miserior  quam  ille, 
quern.  T.  I,  32  :  Melior  natura  quam  eorum,  qui.  Ti. 
40  :  maius  vinculum  quam  ilia  quibus.  T.  I,  42  :  ardentior 
animus  quam  est  hie  aer,  quem.  T.  Ill,  73  :  viliores  quam 
plerique,  qui.  T.  V,  56  :  beatior  ille  quam  is,  qui.  L.  I, 
14  :  humiliora  quam  ilia,  quae.  L.  I,  28  :  haec  maiora  quam 
ipsa  ilia  quorum!  Lael.  4  :  aptior  persona  quam  eius,  qui. 
^.  II,  3  :  maiorem  ducem  quam  quemquam  eorum,  qui.         A. 

II,  95  :  quod  odiosius  quam  ilia,  quam.         F.  I,  45  :  quae  aptior 


28  Terms  of  Comparison  Modified. 

quam  ilia,  qua  ...  F,  II,  55  :  verisimilius  hutic  mentiri  quam 
ilium  qui.  F.  II,  108  :  gratulator  laetior  sit  quam  is,  cui. 
Mil,  37,  loi  :    dignior  locus  quam   hie,  qui.  Verr.  I,  15,  39  : 

occultiores  insidiae  quam  eae,  quae.  Verr.  I,  21,  57:  maior 

iucunditas  quam  ista  voluptas,  quae.  Verr.  I,  46,  118  :  digni- 

ores  homines  quam  nos,  qui.  Marc.  2,  4:  laudem  ampliorem 

quam  eam  quam.  Dom.  5,  10  :  Quae  causa  maior  quam  fames 
esse  potuit,  quam  seditio  quam  consilia  tua  tuorumque  qui  ?  This 
is  a  rhetorical  question  (see  Category  XVI),  so  that  we  should 
expect  the  ablative ;  but  the  speaker  is  carried  along  so  rapidly  in 
his  denunciation  of  consilia  tua  that  he  allows  the  clause  modifying 
that  to  influence  his  whole  construction.  Brut.  18,  72  :  minor  is, 
qui  .  .  .  ,  quam  ii,  qui.  Brut.   35,    132  :  liber  notior  quam  illi 

tres  de  quibus.  Brut.  73,  255  :  plus  dignitatis  quam  illi,  qui. 
Prov.  Cons.  6,  14  :  amicos  prudentiores  quam  Gabinius  cuius. 
Harus.  18,  39  :  graviores  iras  quam  illos,  qui.  Harus.  26,  55  v 
quae  occultiora  quam  eius,  qui.  Lig.  11,  31  :  beatiores  illi 
quam  tu  ipse,  qui.  Invent.  I,  44,  82  :  difficilius  et  mains  quam 
id,  quod.  Leg.  Agr.  I,  i,  3:  inertiorem  consulem  quam  viros, 
qui.  Leg.  Agr.  Ill,  2,9:  commodiore  condicione  quam  ilia, 
quae.  Sex.  Rose.  5,  14:  indigniora  quam  haec  quae.  Font. 
18,  40  :  meliore  fortuna  Fonteius  quam  ille  de  quibus.  Caec. 
18,  58  :  graviorem  iudicem  quam  te  ipsum,  cui. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

IV,  59  :  celerior  est  quam  ille,  qui :  melior  imperator  quam  ille^ 

qui. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  I,  52,  7  :  expeditior  quam  ii,  qui 

Nepos. 

Epam.  2,  I  :  minore  gloria  quam  Damon  aut  Lamprus,  quorum. 

Exceptions  to  this  rule  occur  as  follows  : 

Cicero. 

Att.  XVI,  1 6 A,  7  :  nemo  amicior  nee  iucundior  nee  carior 
Attico  cuius.  De  Or.  II,  37,  154:  elariores,  graviores,  politi- 
ores  P.  Africano,  C.  Laelio,  L.  Furio,  qui.         Fam.  X,  26,  3 : 


Terms  of  Comparison  Modified.  29 

ulla  est  praetura  vel  officio,  quod  vel  gloria,  quam  dulcior?  Dom. 
30,  80  :  Quid  te  audacius,  qui  ?  Dom.  48,  125  :  quid  te  impu- 
rius,  qui?  Sest.  68,  142:  Quis  Carthaginiensium  pluris  fuit 
Hannibale,  qui  .  .  .  ?  The  first  two  are  drawn  into  the  ablative 
by  the  strength  of  the  universal  negative  (see  Category  XV). 
The  other  four  are  influenced  by  the  virtual  universal  negative 
force  inherent  in  the  rhetorical  question. 

One  exception  apparently  admits  of  no  explanation,  viz  : 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  VI,  26,  I  :  cornu  exsistit  excelsius  niagisque  directum 
his,  quae.  The  presence  of  magis  with  directum,  would  also  lead 
us  to  expect  quam  with  the  nominative  here,  (see  Category  IX). 

B. 

One  or  other  of  the  elements  of  the  comparison  is  modified 
by  the  genitive  of  a  noun — more  rarely  of  a  pronoun  ;  quam  fol- 
lows. The  instances  where  the  genitive  modifies  the  second  ele- 
ment will  be  given  first. 

Plautus. 
Bacch.  651  :  Nequius  nil  est  quam  egens  consili  servos. 

Lucretius. 

IV,  180  :  est  cycni  melior  canor,  ille  gruum  quam  clamor  in 
aetheriis  dispersus  nubibus  austri. 

Cicero. 

Dom.  41,  109  :  Quid  est  sanctius,  quid  omni  religione  munitius 
quam  domus  unius  cuiusque  civium  ?  Rab.  3,8:  cariorem 
sororis  maritum  quam  sororis  filium  fuisse.  In  this  and  the 
Lucretius  passage  above  there  is  a  genitive  modifying  each  mem- 
ber of  the  comparison  :  such  an  occurrence  is  frequent.  Verr. 

I,  27,  69  :  gravius  nomen  legationis  quam  iniuria  legati.  Verr. 

II,  38,  95  :  omnia  aequiora  et  placabiliora  quam  animum  prae- 
toris.  Phil.  IX,  5,  12  :  monumentum  clarius  quam  effigiem 
morum  suorum.  N.  II,  103  :  luna  maior  quam  dimidia  pars 
terrae.  D.  I,  36  :  aequius  esse  se  oppetere  mortem  quam  P. 
Africani  filiam.         Att.   XIII,  6,  2  :  quod  honestius  quam  soli- 


30  Terms  of  Comparison  Modified. 

tudinem  Catonis.  Fam.  II,  8,  2  :  tu  plus  posses  quam  qui  vis 
nostrum.  Fam.  IX,  15,  2  :  sed  saliores  quam  illi  Atticorum. 
De  Or.  I,  45,  199  :  honestius  perfugium  quam  iuris  interpretatio. 
Part.  Or.  32,  112  :  poena  levior  quam  facti  praemium.  Part. 
Or.  32,  112  :  facinoris  voluptas  maior  quam  damnationis  dolor. 
Plane.  2,5:  amicitiae  certius  vinculum  quam  consensus  et  societas 
consiliorum  voluntatum. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

IV,  41  :  atrocior  suspicio  quam  explanatio  facti. 

Nepos. 

Phocion,  I,  I  :  multo  eius  notior  integritas  vitae  quam  rei 
militaris  labor. 

There  are  two  exceptions  to  the  principles  stated  in  this  sub- 
section, viz : 

Cicero. 

Fam,  XII,  13,  I  :  tua  toga  omnium  armis  felicior.  Cael.  27, 
64  :  res  multorum  oculis  esset  testatior,  this  one,  too,  despite 
the  subjunctive  (see  Category  XI). 

I  now  give  the  instances  where  the  first  element  of  the  com- 
parison is  modified  by  a  genitive  : 

Plautus. 

Poen.  131 3  :  plenior  albi  ulpicique  quam  Romani  remiges. 

Cicero. 

D.  II,  23  :  ignoratio  malorum  utilior  quam  scientia.  Att. 
VIII,  1,3:  quorum  nemo  stultior  quam  L.  Domitius  nee  incon- 
stantiorquam  Ap.  Claudius.  Div.  Caec.  19,  61  :  Nullam  neque 
iustiorem  neque  graviorem  causam  necessitudinis  quam  coniunc- 
tionem  sortis,  quam  provinciae,  quam  ofi&cii,  quam  publici  muneris 
societatem.  Phil.  VIII,  4,  12  :  causa  iustior  belli  gerendi  quam 
servitutis  depulsio.  Balb.  5,  11  :  patriae  salus  dulcior  quam 
conspectus. 


Comparative  Adjective  Modified.  31 


One  or  other  of  the  terms  of  comparison  is  modified  by  an 
adjective  or  adjective  phrase.  This  principle  is  far  more  likely 
to  show  exceptions  than  any  of  those  thus  far  set  up.  Nearly  all 
these  exceptions,  however,  will  be  placed  under  other  categories, 
to  w^hich  we  must  look  for  an  explanation  of  them. 

Plautus. 

Pseud.  153  :  vostrum  durius  tergum  quam  terginum  hoc  meum. 

Cicero. 

Att.  XII,  2,1:  Gratior  celeritas  tua  quam  ipsa  res.  Att.  XV, 
9,  I  :  hoc  melius  quam  ilia  Trepa-LKrj  porticus.  The  presence  of  the 
Greek  adjective  here  precludes  the  possibility  of  an  ablative. 
JV.  II,  32  :  mundus  melior  quam  ulla  natura.  Or.  26,  91  : 
plenius  quam  hoc  enucleatum,  quam  illud  ornatum  copiosumque 
summissius. 

One  exception  occurs  that  is  due  to  no  apparent  cause.  The 
first  element  is  modified  by  a  prepositional  phrase  that  is  equiva- 
lent to  an  attributive  adjective ;  an  ablative  follows. 

Cicero. 

Phil.  II,  15,  37  :  pax  cum  civibus  bello  civili  utilior. 


VII. 

The  comparative  adjective  is  modified  by  a  noun  in  the  dative 
case  ;  quam  follows  with  the  same  case  as  precedes. 

Cicero. 

Att.  VIII,  II  D,  8  :  amicior  C.  Caesari  quam  illi ;  amiciores  rei 

publicae  quam  ego.         Pkit.   X,   8,    16  :    amicior  causae  quam 

filius. 

Sallust. 

/ug.  50,  6  :  opportunior  fugae  collis  quam  campi. 


32  Adjective  in  Secmid  Member. 

VIII. 

The  comparison  is  instituted  : 

A. 

With  a  noun  modified  by  an  adjective,  or  pronoun  and  is  fol- 
lowed in  the  second  member  by  an  adjective  agreeing  with  the 
noun  understood.     The  quam-Q.ons\x\XQ.\XQW  is  used. 

Plautus. 

Most.  657  :    Nullum  genus  est  hominum   taetrius  nee  minus 

bono  cum  iure  quara  danisticum.         Rud.  239  :  minor  pars  meast 

quam   tua.  Trin.   388  :    Gravius  tuum  unum  verbum  quam 

centum  mea. 

Cato. 

Agr.  105  :  hoc  vinum  deterius  quam  Coum. 

Terence. 

Heaut.  354  :  mea  res  minor  quam  tua. 

Varro. 

i?.  7?.  I,  2,  4 :  haec  temperatior  pars  quam  interior.         R.  R. 

I,  2,  4  :  salubrior  pars  septentrionalis  quam  meridiana.         R.  R. 

II,  3,  I  :  novella  quam  vetus  utilior.  R.  R.  11,  11,4:  melius 
leporinum  et  haedinum  quam  agninum.  R.  R.  11,  11,  6  :  me- 
lior  fossilis  quam  marinus.  R,  R.  Ill,  2,  3  :  frugalior  ac  me- 
lior  quam  tua  ilia  perpolita. 

Cicero. 

Fam.  IV,  4,  2  :  melior  tua  quam  nostra  condicio.  Flacc.  30, 
74 :  honestior  civitas  Pergamena  quam  Smyrnaea.  Sull.  29, 
81  :  inveterata  quam  recens  gravior.  Phil.  V,  17,  48  :  quae 
aetas  minor  quam  consularis.  Or.  71,  237  :  hoc  meum  verius 
quam  tuum.  De  Or.  Ill,  25,  98  :  moUiores  et  delicatiores  flec- 
tiones  et  falsae  voculae  quam  certae  et  severae.  N.  I,  66  :  vera 
an  falsa  (oracula)  nescio,  sed  veri  tamen  similiora  quam  vestra. 
C.  60  :  extrema  aetas  beatior  quam  media.  O.  I,  74  :  res  urba- 
nae  maiores  clarioresque  quam  bellicae.  O.  I,  74  :  res  bellicas 
maiores  quam  urbanas.         O.  II,  24  :  acriores  morsus  intermissae 


Adjectives  Compared  by  Magis.  33 

libertatis  quara  retentae.         F.  Ill,  47  :  bonum  raeliorem  longum 
quam  brevem.  Top.  10,  45  ;  ea  oratoria  magis  quam  vestra. 

Top.  18,  70  :  efficiens  causa  gravior  quam  non  efl&ciens. 

B. 

The  comparison  is  instituted  with  an  adjective  ;  quam  with 
another  adjective  follows  : 

Plautus. 

Capt.  45  :  plus  insciens  quam  prudens  boni.  Most.  289  :  mu- 
lier  nuda  quam  purpurata  pulcrior.  Most.  1115  :  elixus  quani 
assus  suavior.  Trin.  904  :  apsens  quam  praesens  longior. 

Terence. 
Hec.  879  :  plus  boni  feci  imprudens  quam  sciens. 

Cicero. 

Fam.  VI,  6,  10 :  Pompeius  animatus  melius  quam  paratus. 
Or.  68,  228  :  maiorem  apta  vim  quam  soluta.  Z".  I,  86  :  plures 

fortunati  quam  infelices. 

Nepos. 

Alcib.  3,4:  et  potentior  et  maior  quam  privatus. 


IX. 

Adjectives  compared  with  magis  are  followed  not  by  an  ablative 
but  by  quam,  even  though  they  are  correlated  with  an  adjective 
regularly  compared  in  -ior  -ius.  The  same  case  follows  the  quam 
as  precedes  it,  as  in  each  of  the  categories  already  cited.  When 
this  case  is  the  nominative,  the  verb  esse  is  sometimes  present, 
sometimes  not. 

Plautus. 

Aid.  422  :  sum  mollior  magis  quam  ullus  cinaedus.  Most. 
1162  :  orator  magis  impetrabilis  quam  tu.  True.  216  ;  magis 

consularis  hie  amicust,  quam  auxiliarius. 


34  Comparative  Modified  by  Ablative  of  Difference. 

Cicero. 

Harus.  12,  25  :  magis  inquinatum,  deforniatum,  perversum 
quam  omne  servitium. 

The  quam  construction  here  occurs  despite  the  effect  of  a  rhe- 
torical question.     (See  Category  XVI.) 

Absolute  negatives  cause  the  only  exceptions,  e.  g. 

Cicero. 

O.  I,  47  :  nullum  officium  referenda  gratia  magis  necessarium. 
Other  apparent  exceptions  will  be  found  in  their  proper  places 
with  negatives  (See  Category  XV). 

There  are  three  instances  where  some  form  of  esse  appears  with 
the  second  term  of  the  comparison — all  from  Plautus  : 

Cist.  653  :  NuUam  magis  auun  excruciabilem  quam  illaec  est. 
Poen.  276  :  mage  immortalis  quam  ego  siem.  Rud.  227  :  magis 
solae  terrae  solae  sunt  quem  haec  sunt  loca  atque  hae  regiones. 


X, 

When  the  comparative  adjective  is  modified  by  an  ablative  of 
degree  of  difference,  e.g.^  multo,  nihilo,  or  words  of  a  simi- 
ilar  character,  the  ablative  of  comparison  is  never  used. 

Plautus. 

Cas.  10  :  multo  nequiores  quam  nummi  novi.  Pseud.  328  : 
hie  multo  potior  Juppit^r  quam  Juppiter.  Rud.  521  :  multo 
tanto  miserior  quam  tu.  Rud.  1305  :  una  littera  plus  quam 
medicus. 

Terence. 

Adel.  705  :  melior  multo  quam  ego. 

Varro. 

R.  R.  Ill,  6,  I  :  aliquanto  pauciores  mares  quam  feminae. 

Lucretius. 

Ill,  426  :  multo  minoribus  esse  principiis  factam  quam  liqui- 
dus  umor  aquai  aut  nebula  aut  fumus.         IV,  849  :  multo  anti- 


Comparative  Modified  by  Ablative  of  Difference.  35 

quius  quara  lecti  mollia  strata.  V,  iii  :  multo  certa  ratione 
raagis  quam  Pythia.  V,  628  :  inferior  multo  quam  fervida 
signa.         V,  632  :  flaccidiore  quanto  turbine  inferior  quam  sol  . 

Cicero. 

Att.  I,  16,  4  :  res  multo  honorificentior  quam  ilia.  Att.  I, 
19,  I  :  multo  crebrior  quam  tu.  Att.  II,  12,  4:  civis  pauUo 
melior  quam  isti  nostri  aBiKaLapxaL.  The  impossibility  of  putting 
the  Greek  noun  in  the  ablative  would  necessitate  a  guam  here, 
even  \i paullo  were  not  present.  Att.  V,  20,  3  :  pauUo  melior 

quam  aut  tu  aut  ego.  Ad  Brut.  I,  15,  8  :  paullo  plures  male- 
volos  quam  gratos.  Fam.  IV,  14,  3  :  nihilo  meliores  res  do- 
mesticas  quam  rem  publicam.  Fam.  V,  7,  3  :  me  multo  mino- 
rem  quam  lyaelium.  Fa^n.  IX,  20,  3  :  paullo  sum  quam  ipsi 
doctior.  Fam.  XII,  2,  i  :  multoque  nequior  quam  ille  ipse. 
Z".  V,  115  :  nihilo  ipse  Cyclops  quam  aries  ille  prudentior.  F. 
II,  88  :  nihilo  beatior  Juppiter  quam  Epicurus.  F.  IV,  23  : 
nihilo  plus  quam  tu.  O.  Ill,  35  :  omni  pondere  gravior  quam 
reliqua  omnia.  N.  II,  30  :  multo  aptiorquam  hie  noster  calor. 
N.  II,  92  :  sol  multis  partibus  maior  atque  amplior  quam  terra 
universa.  i^.  II,  18  :  Paullo  antiquiora  quam  hie  sermo  est. 
C.  67  :  aetas  ilia  multo  plures  quam  nostra  casus  mortis.  A. 
II,  43  :  nihilo  magis  vera  ilia  quam  falsa.  Piso,  17,  40  :  paulo 
quam  ille  demissior.  Sex.  Rose.  2  :  tanto  officiosior  quam  ceteri. 
Verr.  {Act.  Pr.)  13,  37  :  hoc  paulo  amplius  quam  privatus. 
Verr.  I,  27,  70  :  multo  scelestior  et  nequior  quam  ille  Hadrianus. 
Verr.  Ill,  93,  214  :  Remissior  aliquanto  aestimatio  quam  annona. 
Verr.  IV,  31,  70  :  multo  acrior  quam  ego  sum.  Verr.  IV,  55, 

123  :  quanto  taetrior  hie  tyrannus  quam  quisquam.  Mur.  9, 
22  :  multo  plus  adferat  dignitatis  quam  gloria.  Mur.  28,  58  : 
multo  magis  auctoritatem  quam  criminationem.  De  Or.  I,  3, 
II  :  multo  pauciores  oratores  quam  poetae  boni.  Brut.  21,  83  : 
multo  vetustior  et  horridior  ille  quam  Scipio.  Brut.  43,  161  : 
Triennio  minor  quam  Antonius.  Brut.  49,  182  :  inferiores 
paullo  quam  lulius.  Brut.  68,  240  :  biennio  quam  nos  maior. 


36  Comparative  Modified  by  Ablative  of  Difference. 

Caesar. 
B.  6^.  V,  13,  2  :  dimidio  minor  quam  Britannia. 

Sallust. 

J'^S'  58*  3  •  locum  paulo  quam  alii  editiorem. 

There  is,  at  least,  one  instance  where  we  find  not  multo  but 
multum  to  express  a  relation  almost  identical  with  that  expressed 
by  the  ablative  of  degree  of  difference.     It  is  found  in  Cicero. 

De  Or.  Ill,  24,  92  :  multum  mains  quam  illud  vulgare  et 
forense. 

There  are  but  three  exceptions  to  this  category. 

Cicero. 

Att.   IX,    2a,   I  :    quanto   et    honos   hie   illo   amplior   et    ipse 

robustior.         Quint.    II,    3,   4:    multo  superiores  ipsius  copiis, 

where  beside  the  influence  of  multo  we  have  the  genitive  ipsius 

modifying  copiis,  the  second  element  in  the  comparison  (category 

F/,  B.)     R.  IV,  I  :  quanto  praestabilior  animus  corpore. 

There  are  a  few  instances  where  quam  is  used  because  of  the 

presence  in  the  sentence  of  an  ablative  of  a  kind  other  than  the 

ablative  of  *  degree  of  difference  ' .     If  the  ablative  of  comparison 

were    employed,     it    would    lead    to    unnecessary     confusion  : 

the  quam  avoids   '  the  concurrence  of  two  ablatives  in  different 

meanings  '.^ 

Lucretius. 

Ill,  1026  :  melior  multis  quam  tu. 

Varro. 
R.  R.  II,  8,  6  :  hinnus  minor  quam  mulus  corpore. 

Cicero. 

Att.  X,  14,  2  :  nescio  quomodo  imbecillior  medicina  quam 
morbus.         Brut.  70,   246  :  minor  natu  quam  nos.  T.  I,  3  : 

maior  natu  quam  Plautus  et  Naevius. 

*  Fischer,  1.  c,  obs.  15.  A. 


Verb  in  the  Subju7ictive .  37 


XI. 

Cicero  exhibits  an  individual  peculiarity  in  using  quam  in 
clauses  where  the  verb,  for  any  reason  whatever,  appears  in  the 
subjunctive  mood.  One  general  exception  is  to  be  noted  :  if  the 
subjunctive  occurs  in  a  universal  negative  sentence  (whether  of 
the  nominative  or  accusative  type),  the  ablative  is  commonly 
used,  though  there  seems  to  be  enough  power  inherent  in  the 
subjunctive  to  draw  even  some  of  these  to  a  ^2^«;;2-construction. 
There  are  but  three  of  the  negative  class  in  which  we  find  quam, 
against  twenty-five  showing  an  ablative.  It  will  be  seen,  then, 
that  this  category  especially  appears  in  affirmative  sentences. 

O.  I,  89  :  ne  maior  poena  quam   culpa  sit.  O.  I,  42  :    ne 

maior  benignitas  sit  quam  facultates.  6>.  I,  44  :  ne  benignitas 

maior  esset  quam  facultates.  L.  II,  45  :  ne  operosius  quam 
mulieris  opus  menstruum.  Here  the  ^w^w-construction  may  be 
due  to  the  genitive  mulieris  modifying  opus  in  the  second  term  of 
the  comparison,  (Category  VI,  B).  i?.  I,  38  :  ut  sit  illustrior 
ilia  ipsa  res  quam  oratio  mea.  C.  72  :  ut  animosior  senectus  sit 

quam  adulescentia.  Brut.  \2,  \^^\  ne  inferior  esset  quam  Scae- 
vola.  Fam.  VII,  25,  2  :  Cave  putes  quidquam  melius  quam 
epistolae  tuae  partem.  Here  also  the  ^««w- construction  may  be 
attributed  partly  to  the  genitive  (see  Category  VI,  B).  The  two 
influences  together  seem  strong  enough  to  balance  the  universal 
negative  ne  quidquam,  which  would  usually  demand  an  ablative 
(Category  XV),  and  an  ablative  under  similar  circumstances  is 
actually  found  in  one  case,  viz  :  De  Or,  III,  9,  32  :  ut  nihil  eo 
possit  esse  praestantius.  This  constitutes  the  sole  exception  to 
the  principle  of  the  category  in  ut  and  «<f-clauses. 

Further  examples  are  :  Fa77i.  X,  12,  i  :  Cave  putes  ullas  um- 
quam  litteras  gratiores  quam  tuas  esse  recitatas.  F.  II,  105  : 
ut  proverbia  veriora  sint  quam  dogmata.  N.  I,  77  :  ut  nihil 
pulchrius  quam  hominem  putaret.  Plane.  6,  10  :  ut  fueris 
dignior  quam  Plancius.  Phil.  II,  i,  i  :  ut  audacior  quam  Cati- 
lina,  furiosior  quam  Clodius  viderere.     Plautus  shows  an  instance 


38  Verb  in  the  Subjunctive. 

where  the  same  cause  produces  a  quam,  viz  :  Pers.  237  :  tu  ut  sis 
prior  quam  ego  sieni. 

All  the  above  examples  contain  either  ut  or  ne  as  an  introduc- 
tory element.  In  other  types  of  the  subjunctive  we  find  illustra- 
tions of  our  principle  in  Varro,  L.  L.  VI,  35  :  qui  sint  obscuriora 
quam  alia.  If  we  except  one  sentence  from  Cato  {^Agr.  I,  i), 
the  construction  in  which  might  just  as  well  be  attributed  to  other 
causes,  all  the  remaining  examples  come  from  Cicero.  The  Cato 
passage  reads  :  quanto  peiorem  civem  existimarent  faeneratorem 
quam  furem.  The  accusative  here  would  allow  quafn  (Category 
IV,  2a.)  ;  the  quanto  would  demand  it  (Category  X). 

Cicero. 

O.  I,  116  :  qui  inferior  fuisset  quam  pater.  Phil.  XIV,  12,  32  : 
si  esset  longior  quam  haec  vita.  Piso,  1,3:  nequior  quam  Ga- 
binius  exstitisses.  Piso,  14,  33  :  fuga  quam  provincia  esset 
optatior.  Brut.  82,  283  :  qui  cum  esset  eruditior  quam  Curio. 
De  Or.  I,  21,  95  :  si  quis  pluraque  quam  hie  audierit.  Att. 
XIV,  20,  3  :  quemquam  meliorem  quam  se  arbitraretur.  Fam. 
I,  8,  6  :  carior  sit  quam  meae  res  omnes.  Fam.  II,  7,  2  :  me- 
lius consilium  dare  possit  quam  tu.  Fam.  XV,  20,  2  :  tu  fre- 
quentior  esse  debeas  quam  nos.  D.  II,  10  :  sol  maiorne  quam 

terra   sit?         T.   Ill,    11  :    mains   esse  videatur   quam   insania. 

There  are  a  few  exceptions  to  this  tendency  to  be  found  in  Cicero : 
O.  I,  82  :  callida  consilia  quietis  splendidiora  et  maiora  videantur. 
F.  I,  70  :  quod  coniunctione  tali  sit  aptius.  Fam.  I,  9,  i  : 
nomen  levius  meritis  erga  me  tuis  esse  videatur.  Fain.  XII, 
30,  7  :  persuadeas  non  esse  meam  dignitatem  tua  cariorem.  This 
occurs  in  an  accusative  sentence  (Category  IV,  la). 


XII. 

Publilius  Syrus  gives  us  a  few  examples  of  an  infinitive  stand- 
ing as  the  real  subject  of  the  verb  and  a  comparative  adjective  as 
predicate  modifier  of  the  infinitive.  The  comparative  adjective  is 
followed  by  quam.     No  other  author  furnishes  an  instance  : 


The  Comparative  a  Genitive  of  Price  or   Value.  39 

477  :  obiurgari  gravius  est  quam  calamitas.  493  :  Plus  est 
quam  poena  sinere  miserum  vivere.  501  :  plus  est  quam  poena 
iniuriae  succumbere. 


XIII. 

The  genitive  of  price  is  expressed  by  a  comparative  ;  quam 
follows  : 

Plautus. 

Asin.  435  :  pluris  quam  illest.  Bacch.  630 :  pluris  pretist 
quam  ego  sum.  Most.  883  :  minoris  pendo  tergum  quam  meum. 
True.  489  :  Pluris  oculatus  testis  quam  auriti  decem. 

Naevius. 

Agitatoria,  Frag.  Ill  :  pluris  feci  libertatum  quam  pecuniam. 
(Ribbeck,  II,  7.) 

Varro. 

^.  7?.  I,  13,  6  :  villae  rusticae  maioris  preti  quam  urbanae. 
R.  R.  I,  22,  4  :  Vetera  quam  nova,  et  eadem  alio  tempore  quam 
alio  pluris.         R.  R.  I,  38,  2  :  minoris  quam  ii,  qui. 

Cicero. 

Verr.  Ill,  16,  40:  pluris  quam   ceteri.  Verr.  Ill,    16,  40: 

pluris  quam  ceteros.  Verr.  Ill,  33,  77  :  pluris  quam  superiore 

anno.  Verr.  Ill,  50,  119  :  pluris  Verrem  quam  hominem,  cui. 

Verr.  Ill,  63,  147  :  pluris  quam  te.  Or.  67,  224  :  domum  pluris 
quam  te  aestimasti.  Scaur.  22,  45,  n  :  pluris  quam  te.  Plane. 
20,  50  :  gra vitas  pluris  quam  aedilitas.  Prov.  Cons.  5,  12  :  se 
pluris  quam  collegam.  Sex.  Rose.  16,  46  :  minoris  Eutychum 
quam  Chaerestratum.  Phil.  VI,  4,  10  :  pluris  quam  Trebellius, 
plurisquam  Plancus.  Pet.  Con.  3,  11:  omnia  pluris  quam  nobilitas. 
F.  Ill,  23  :  pluris  eum,  cui  ....  quam  ilium,  a  quo.  O.  Ill,  51  : 
pluris  quam  ceteri,  fortasse  etiam  minoris.  N,  II,  32  :  minoris 
quam  nosmet  ipsi  sum  us.  A^.  II,  32  :  pluris  quam  mundum. 
N.  II,  32  :  pluris  quam  partem  aliquam  universi.  N.  Ill,  26  : 
pluris  quam  mundum.  C  61  :  ea  pluris  quam  omnes  adule- 
scentiae  voluptates.         Att.  Ill,  10,  2  :  pluris  quam  me  ipsum. 


40  The  Comparative  a  Genitive  of  Price  or   Value. 

Att.  V,  20,  6  :  pluris  est  quam  omnia.  Att.  VII,  1,3:  quem- 
quam  pluris  facere  quam  me.  Att.  VII,  3,  8  :  pluris  ea  quam 

omnem  pecuniam.  Att.  XII,  21,5:  te  pluris  quam  illos.  Att. 
XII,  28,  2  :  conscientia  pluris  quam  sermo.  Att.  XVI,  5,  2  : 
quod  pluris  est  quam  omnia.  Fam.  I,  9,  15  :  pluris  deam 
quam  sorores.  Fa7n.  VII,  10,  4  :  congressio  pluris  quam  hostes. 
Fam.  VII,  II,  2  :  collocutio  nostra  pluris  quam  Samarobrivae. 
Fam.  XI,  3,4:  pluris  libertatem  quam  amicitiam. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  32,  5:  quam  minoris  quam  publicam.  Jug.  85,  39: 
pluris  preti  coquum  quam  villicum.  Jug.  85,  2  :  pluris  res- 
publica  quam  consulatus  aut   praetura.  Cat.   52,    5  :    tabulas 

pluris  quam  rempublicam. 

Cornelius    Nepos. 

Epami7iondas ,  10,  4 :  unum  hominem  pluris  quam  civitatem. 
Cato,  I,  4:  quod  minoris  quam  quemlibet.  Datames,  5,  2  : 
unum  pluris  quam  se. 

There  is  but  one  exception  to  this  class,  and  that  exception  is 

capable  of  explanation. 

Cicero. 

Sest.  68,  142  :  Quis  Carthaginiensium  pluris  fuit  Hannibale, 
consilio,  virtute,  rebus  gestis,  qui  .  .  ? 

There  are  causes  enough  here,  one  would  think,  in  the  genitive 
modifier  of  the  first  term  of  the  comparison  (Category  VI,  B)  ;  the 
^«/ clause  modifying  the  second  term  (Category  VI,  A)  :  the  other 
ablatives  in  the  sentence  (Category  V),  to  cause  the  appearance 
of  quam,  if  we  are  ever  justified  in  expecting  it.  But  this  sentence 
is  a  rhetorical  question  and,  therefore,  the  ablative  appears.  (See 
Category  XVI). 

XIV. 

The  noun  or  pronoun  with  which  the  comparison  is  instituted 
is  in  the  nominative,  the  comparative  adjective  agrees  with  it ; 
either  the  ablative  or  quam,  follows  ;  if  quam,  the  second  term  of 
the  comparison  is  expressed  by  the  nominative. 


Comparison  Instituted  with  a  Nominative.  41 

A. 

Quam  +  nominative. 

Ennius. 
A.  240  :  haec  melior  navis  quam  quae  stlataria  portat. 

Plautus. 

Most.  43  :  neque  superior  quam  erus  accumbere.  Poen.  581  : 
condoctior  sum  quam  tragoedi  aut  comici. 

Cato. 

Orig.  Frag.  21  :  Antemna  veterior  est  quam  Roma. 

Varro. 

7?.  /?.  I,  4,  3  :  ager,  qui  salubrior  est  quam  alii.  R.  R.  I,  6, 
2  :  ea  tepidiora  quam  infima  aut  summa.  R.  R.  II,  5,  9  :  utri- 
que  plures  quam  nigri  et  albi.  R.  R.  Ill,  2,  ^\  sumptuosior 
quam  omnes.         L.  L.  V,  82  :  quod  minores  quam  hi  magistri. 

Cicero. 

Or.  40,  139  :  significatio  niaior  quam  oratio.  De  Or.  II,  60, 
245  :  index  brevior  quam  testis.  Briit.  82,  285  :  floridior  quam 
Hyperides,  quam  Lysias.  T.  II,  14  :  etiamne  mains  quam  de- 

decus?  T.  II,   28  :  etiamne  mains  quam   dedecus.  T.  II, 

31  :  tnrpitudo  peins  quam  dolor.  F.  IV,  10  :  ars  tamen  est 
dux  certior  quam  natura.  The  form  of  this  sentence  is  unpar- 
alleled ;  in  no  other  instance  do  we  find  a  predicate  appositive 
appearing  in  comparative  sentences  as  dux  does  here.  F.  IV, 
43  :  deterior  quam  ceteri.  F.  IV,  59  :  non  illi  plus  tribuunt 
quam  Zeno.  Piso.  ij, /[O  :  nequior  es  quam  Gabinius.  Piso, 
26,  62  :  tu  eruditior  quam  Piso,  prudentior  quam  Cotta,  abundan- 
tior  consilio  quam  Crassus.  Plane.  6,  16  :  Hie  quam  ille 
dignior.         Suit.  26,  73  :  cupidior  hie  quam  ceteri.         Rab.  12, 

32  :  senatus  diligentior  aut  inclementior  quam  vos.  Verr.  Ill, 
82,  190:  facilior  existimatio  quam  reprehensio.  Verr.  IV,  20, 
45  :  tu  dignior  Verres  quam  Calidius?  Fam.  VII,  20,  i  :  Velia 
vilior  quam  I^upercal.  Att.  Ill,  19,  2  :  spes  tenuior  quam 
litterae.  Att.  IV,  15,  6  :  niaior  fuit  quam  Astyanax.  Att. 
IX,  13,  6  :  meliores  quam   nos.         Att.    XI,    6,    1  :  quod  levins 


42  Compariso7i  Instituted  with  a  Nominative. 

quani   tuuni  iudicium.         Att.   XII,   43,   2  :  maior  res  est  quam 
facultates  nostrae. 

Sallust. 

Cat.    23,   2  :  noil   minor  vanitas  quam   audacia.  Cat   7,  2  : 

boni  quam  mali  suspectiores. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

II,  17,  25  :  plura  aut  maiora  officia  quam  maleficia  videbuntur. 

B. 
In  the  following  examples  the  ablative  appears  : 

Cato. 
Agr.  28,  2  :  arbores  crassiores  digitis  V. 

Varro. 

R.  R.  Ill,  16,  10:  agellus  maior  iugero  uno. 

Cicero. 

P.  3,  26 :  vita  omni  gestu  moderatior,  omni  versu  aptior. 
F.  II,  48  :  quod  voluptatibus  iucundius.  A^.  II,  16  :  id  homine 
melius  est,  (twice).  N.  II,  36:  homine  deterior.  N.  Ill, 
25  :  melior  homine.  Mil.  22,  59  :  morteipsa  tristius.  Phil. 
X,  9,  19  :  quae  servitute  potior.  Fam.  VI,  6,  7  :  quae  certiora 
illis.  Fam.  XVI,  16,  2  :  quae  his  ipsis  commodis  potiora. 
Att.  X,  4,  4  :  dignitas  posterior  sua  dominatione  et  domesticis 
commodis.        Att.  XI,  18,  i  :  supplicium  levius  hac  permansione. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  67,  3  :  turpis  vita  integra  fama  potior.  Hist.  Frag.  26  : 
potiorque  libertas  quieto  servitio. 

Catullus. 

21,8:  tangam  te  prior  irrumatione.  68  B,  117  :  amor  bara- 
thro  altior  illo. 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  criticise  a  statement  made  by 
Landgraf  (Reisig,  Vorl.  iiber  I^at.  Sprach.  p.  665  footnote)  that 
apart  from  certain  well-defined  general  categories  {e.  g.,  neg- 
atives, interrogatives  equivalent  to  a  negative,  and  proverbial 
phrases)     the     adjectives     antiquior,     inferior^     and     posterior 


Universal  Negative  Sentences.  43 

alone  are  followed  by  the  ablative.  There  are  sentences  enough 
in  this  category  to  refute  indisputably  any  such  contention, 
for  we  find  altior,  potior,  levius,  deterior,  crassior.  Further,  Land- 
graf  cannot  hold  that  the  majority  of  cases  where  even  these 
words  occur,  show  the  ablative  where  no  cause  other  than  the 
mere  appearance  of  the  adjective  can  be  proposed  to  account  for 
an  ablative,  e.g.^  Cic.  Brut.  48,  179  :  non  interior  quam  magister. 
But  the  ablative  does  appear  in  Cic.  O.  I,  78  :  domesticae  forti- 
tudines  non  inferiores  militaribus.  This,  too,  in  violation  of  the 
rule  given  in  Category  VIII,  A.  With  Cic.  De  Invent.  I,  43,  80  : 
antiquior  officio  pecunia  est,  compare  Cic.  Frag.  V,  Ep.  Lib. 
Ill,  27  :    antiquior  laetitia  est  quam  lucrum. 


XV. 

We  come  now  to  the  instances,  where  we  must  have  the  abla- 
tive. First,  sentences  in  which  there  is  a  universal  negative,  {nihil, 
nil,nemo,  nullus,  necquisquam,  numqua7n)  show  the  ablative,  where 
the  comparative  adjective  agrees  with  the  nominative  that  con- 
stitutes the  first  term  of  the  comparison.  Such  sentences  are 
always  equivalent  to  an  affirmative  superlative.  This  class  is 
quite  generally  recognized  by  grammarians,^  but  they  do  not,  as 
a  rule,  accurately  limit  its  scope,  commonly  making  it  include  all 
negative  sentences.  Negatives  like  71071,  neque  have  no  such  in- 
fluence on  the  construction,  unless  they  are  capable  of  bearing  the 
meaning  that  7iu7nqua7n  would  have  under  the  same  circumstances. 
By  far  the  larger  portion  of  the  examples  occur  in  colloquial 
Latinity  (Plautus  and  Cicero's  Letters).  The  rule  which  states 
that  the  relative  pronoun  never  has  the  ^z^aw-construction  is  en- 
tirely unnecessary,  for  all  the  examples  for  the  period  under  dis- 
cussion that  can  be  urged  in  support  of  this  theory  fall  under  the 
more  general  statement  of  our  present  category. 

'  Fischer  alone  recognizes  that  this  rule  applies  only  to  '  negative  abso- 
lutes '. 


44  Universal  Negative  Sentences. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  1060:  nee  me  miserior  feminast.  Asin.  118:  noii 
servos  peior  hoc  quisquam.  Asiri.  543  :  te  nil  impudentius. 
Asin.  704 :  nee  te  equo  magis  equos  ullus  sapiens.  This  is  an 
exception  to  the  principle  stated  in  Category  IX.  Bacch.  87  : 
istoe  inleeebrosius  nil.  Bacch.  394  :  ingrato  homine  nil  im- 
pensiust.  Cas.  863  :  Quo  senex  nequior  niiUus.         Meri.  614  ; 

nil  hoc  confidentius.  Men.  631  :  nil  hoc  homine  audacius. 
Merc.  10 1  :  qua  mulier  alia  nuUast  pulerior.  Merc.  335  :  me 
miserior  nullus.  Merc.  700 :  miserior  mulier  me  nee  fiet  nee 
fuit.  Pers.  202  :  nullus  hoc  puero  peior.  Most.  1072  :  hoe 
nemo  doctior.  Pers.  565  :  nullus  te  opulentior.  Pers.  764  : 
nil  hoc  magis  dulcest.  This  also  is  an  exception  to  the  magis  rule 
of  Category  IX.  Poen.  504  :  tardo  amico  nil  quicquam  inaequius. 
Poen.  991  :  nullus  mest  Poenus  Poenior.  Pseud.  339  :  te  nemo 
nequior.  Rud.  279  :  neque  hoe  amplius  quicquamst.  Rnd. 
281  :    misericordior   nulla   mest   feminarum.  Rud.    359  :    te 

aleator  nullus  sapientior.         Rud.  675  :  neque  est  melius  morte. 

Terence. 

Heaut.  55  :  nee  hoc  amplius  quicquam  fuit.  Heaut.  224  : 
neque  me  quisquamst  miserior.  Heaut.  263  :  nemost  miserior 
me.  Eun.  226  :  hoc  nemo  minus  ineptus,  magis  severus,  quic- 
quam nee  magis  continens.  Hec.  861  :  te  numquam  quisquam 
blandior.         Adel.  861  :  Facultate  nil  melius  neque  dementia. 

Afranius. 
Privignus  VI  :    nemo  ilia  earie  curiosicr,  (Ribbeck,   II,   233, 

250). 

Varro. 

R,  R.  Ill,  7,  4  :  nihil  timidius  columba.  R.  R.  Ill,  7,  9  : 
nihil  columbis  feeundius. 

Lucretius. 

I,  652  :  amplius  hoc  nihil.  Ill,  243  :  qua  neque  mobilius 
quicquam  neque  tenuius.         VI,  972  :  qua  nihil  amarius. 


Universal  Negative  Sentences.  45 

Cicero. 

Fam.  I,  7,  II  :  nulla  hac  praestantior  disciplina.  Fam.  II, 
10,  I  :  nee  te  iucundius  quidquam  nee  carius.  Fam.  II,  15,  3  : 
ipsa  republica  nil  carius.  Fam.  Ill,  8,  9  :  qua  nil  inimicius, 
Fam.  Ill,  13,  2  :  qua  nihil  uberius.  Fam.  IV,  2,  3  :  qua  nihil 
utilius.  Fam.  IV,  4,  2  :  quo  nihil  moderatius.  Fam,  IV, 
13,  2  :  quo  nihil  acerbius.  Fam.  V,  14,  i  :  nihil  isto  iucundius. 
Fam.  V,  19,  I  :  quo  neque  gratius  neque  honestius  quidquam. 
Fam.  VI,  4,  3  :  quibus  nihil  festivius.  Fam.  VII,  3,  3  :  iis 
incommodis  nihil  intolerabilius.  Fam.  VII,  8,  2  :  qua  melior 
numquam.  Fam.  VII,  10,  i  :  nemo  peritior  te.  Fam.  VII, 
10,  4  :  nihil  duobus  nobis  stultius.  Fam.  VII,  21  :  nee  melior 
nee  amieior  P.  Silio  quisquam.  Fam.  IX,  14,  4  :  nihil  virtute 
formosius.  Fam.  IX,  14,  7:  nihil  ilia  sapientius.  Fam.  IX, 
15,    I  :    nemo  te  iucundior.  Fam.   X,    20,    3  :    quibus  nulla 

maiora.  Fam.  XI,  15,  i  :  nihil  amabilius  officio  tuo  et  dili- 
gentia.  Fam.  XI,  16,  2  :  nihil  familiaritate  iucundius.  Fam. 
XI,  20,  2  :  nihil  tua  vita  iucundius  neque  carius.  Fam.  XI, 
27,  2  :  nemo  te  antiquius.  Fam.  XI,  27,  8  :  quo  nee  gravius 
quidquam.  Fam.  XII,  4,  i  :  populo  viro  fortius,  nihil  melius 
Italiaque  universa.  Fam.  XII,  4,  i  :  nihil  foedius  Philippo  et 
Pisone,  nihil  flagitiosius.  Fam.  XII,  10,  3  :  tua  virtute  et  mag- 
nitudine  nihil  nobilius.  Fam.  XII,  22,  3  :  qua  nihil  prae- 
stantius.  Fa^n.  XIII,  1,5:  nihil  illo  nee  carius  nee  iucundius. 
Fam.  XIII,  19,  I  :  nihil  familiaritate  nostra  coniunctius.  Fam. 
XIII,  26,  I  :  nee  familiarius  ullo  nee  libentius.  Fam.  XIII, 
64,  I  :  nihil  illo  adulescente  gratius.  Fam.  XIII,  68,  i  :  qua 
nihil  iucundius.  Fa^n.  XIV,  3,  i  :  hoc  miserius  turpius  indig- 
nius  nihil.  Fam.  XV,  4,  4  :  nee  quicquam  Cilicia  munitius. 
Fam.  XV,  4,  16  :  qua  nee  earior  ulla  umquam  res.  Fam.  XV, 
11,2:  qua  carius  nihil.  Fam.  XVI,  5,2:  nihil  illo  humanius. 
Att.  I,  18,  4 :  nihil  illo  homine  lentius.  Att.  II,  8,  i  :  nihil 
me  inertius.  Att.  II,  24,  4  :  nihil  me  infortunatius,  nihil  for- 
tunatius  Catulo,  Att.  II,  25,  2  :  re  publica  nihil  desperatius, 
iis  quorum  opera  nihil  maiore  odio.  Att.   IV,   7,    i  :    nihil 

evKaipoTepov  epistula   tua,    quae.      It  is  seldom,  even  under  this 


46  Universal  Negative  Sentences. 

category,  that  we  find  an  ablative  modified  by  a  ^z^z-clause,  (See 
Category  VI,  A.)  Att.  IV,  16,  8  :  nihil  gratius  illo  monumento, 
nihil  gloriosius.  Att.  V,  i,  4:  nihil  meo  fratre  lenius,  nihil 
asperius  tua  sorore.  Att.  V,  15,  J  :  nihil  optatius  adventii  meo, 
nihil  carius.  Att.  V,  20,  i  :  nihil  ea  iurisdictione  aequabilius. 
Att.  V,  21,  8:  qua  nihil  miserius.  Att.  VI,  i,  4:  nihil  illo 
regno  spoliatius,  nihil  rege  egentius.  Att.  VI,  7,  2  :  nihil  illo 
adulescente  castius.  Att.  VII,  1,2:  neutri  quisquam  me  carior. 
-^//.  VII,  2,  8  :  neillo  quidem  quidquam  improbius.  Att.  VII. 
2,  8:  qua  nihil  sceleratius.  Att.  VIII,  iiB,  3:  quo  nihil 
optatius.  Att.  VIII,  iiD,  i  :  qua  nihil  utilius.  Att.  IX,  7, 
2  :  quibus  nihil  explicatius.  Att.  IX,  13,8:  hoc  nihil  miserius. 
Att.   IX,    13,    8  :    hoc  miserius  nihil.  Att.    X,    8B,    i  :    quo 

gravius  nihil.  Att.  X,  11,  3  :  nihil  eo  tractabilius.  Att.  X, 
13,  I  :  nihil  illo  homine  iucundius.  Att.  XI,  18,  2  :  hoc  perdi- 
tius  nihil.  Att.  XI,  23,  3  :  melius  nihil  discidio.  Att.  XII, 
9  :  nihil  hac  solitudine  iucundius.  Att.  XII,  15  :  nihil  amicius 
solitudine.  Att.  XII,  16  :  nihil  aptius  hac  solitudine.  Att. 
XIII,  25,  3:  nihil  illis  elegantius.  Att.  XIV,  17A,  4:  nihil 
virtute  formosius.  Att.  XIV,  17A,  7  :  nihil  ilia  sapientius. 
Att.  XV,  13,  3  :  qua  nihil  dulcius.  Att.  XV,  13,  6  :  non  quo 
hoc  loco  quidquam  pulcrius.  Att.  XVI,  7,  5  :  hoc  nihil  turpius. 
Att.  XVI,  II,  6:  quibus  nihil  taetrius.  Att.  XVI,  15,  3:  his 
litteris  nihil  prudentius.  Att.  XVI,  15,4:  nihil  iucundius  litteris. 
Att.  XVI,  15,  5  :  non  quo  quidquam  carius.  R.  I,  47  :  qua  nihil 
dulcius.  R.  I,  52:  quo  nihil  moderatius.  R.  II.  21  :  quo 
nemo  praestantior.  R.  II,  27  :  quo  nemo  diligentior.  R, 
II,  42  :  quo  nihil  praeclarius.  R.  II,  48  :  quo  neque  taetrius 
neque  foedius  animal  ullum.  R.  Ill,  45  :  nihil  ista  immanius 

belua.  R.  Ill,  46  :  nihil  ilia  beatius.  7?.  V,  7  :  nee  quic- 
quam  civitate   beatius.  F.    I,    23 :    nihil    homine   indignius. 

F.  II,  II  :  qua  nulla  maior.  F.  II,  40  :  quo  nihil  absurdius. 
F.  Ill,  2  :  qua  nihil  praestantius.  F.  Ill,  74  :  qua  nihil  aptius. 
F.  IV,  40  :  quo  nihil  perversius.  F.  IV,  48  :  quo  nihil  brevius. 
F.  IV,  75  :  nee  honesto  quicquam  honestius  nee  turpi  turpius. 
F.  V,  38  :  qua  nihil  divinius.  Ti.  7  :  neque  mundo  quicquam. 


Universal  Negative  Sejitences.  47 

pulchrius.  Ti.   27  :    quo  nihil    melius.  Ti.  52  :  quo  bono 

nullum    optabilius.  P.    14 :    quo    nihil    praestantius   neque 

divinius.  P,  16  :  quo  beatius  mortal!  nihil.  P.  22  :  nihil 
recto    rectius.  P.    22  :    ne   bono   quid  em    melius   quicquam. 

C.  49  :  nihil  otiosa  senectute  iucundius.  C.  50  :  qua  voluptate 

nulla  certe  maior.  C.  84  :  quo  nemo  melior.         Lael.  5  :  quo 

nemo  prudentior.  Lael.  6  :  nee  melior  vir  Africano  quisquam 
nee  clarior.  Lael.  49  :  nihil  est  remuneratione  benevolentiae» 
nihil  vicissitudine  studiorum  officiumque  iucundius.  Here  the 
ablative  appears  despite  the  genitives  modifying  the  ablatives  of 
comparison.  Lael.  54  :  nee  quicquam  insipienti  fortunato  in- 
tolerabilius.  (9.  I,  42  :  qua  nihil  aceommodatius.         O.  I,  83  : 

quo  nihil  stultius.  O.  I,  88  :  nihil  laudabilius,  nihil  dignius 
placabilitate  atque  dementia.         N.    II,    66  :    nihil  eo  mollius. 

0.  I,  141  :  quo  nihil  aceommodatius.  O.  I,  150:  nee  quicquam 
turpius  vanitate.         O.  I,  151  :  nihil  agri  cultura  melius.         O, 

1,  155  :  qua  (utilitate)  nihil  antiquius.  O.  II,  24:  lis  nihil  de- 
mentius.  O.  Ill,  36  :  quibus  nihil  taetrius,  O.  Ill,  95  : 
qua  nihil  pulcrius.  T.  I,  5  :  nihil  mathematicis  illustrius. 
T.  I,  43:  nihil  animo  veloeius.  T.  I,  94:  nihil  prudentia 
duleius.  T.  II,  44  :  quo  nihil  brevius.  T.  II,  44  :  quo 
nihil  superius.  T.  II,  46  :  nihil  homine  indignius.  T.  II, 
47  :  nihil  homine  deformius.  T.  II,  64  :  nullum  theatrum 
conscientia  mains.  T.  Ill,  18  :  qua  nihil  melius.  T.  Ill, 
22  :  quibus  nihil  uberius.  T.  Ill,  68  :  neque  insipientia  ullum 
maius  malum.  T.  Ill,  70:  qua  nihil  peius.  T,  III,  80: 
quo  pravius  nihil.  T.  V,  26  :  nihil  philosophia  dignius.  T. 
V,  81  :  quo  quid  sit  beatius.  T.  IV,  82  :  qua  nullum  malum 
maius.  T.  V,  97  :  nihil  illo  pane  iucundius.  D.  I,  82  : 
nihil  beneficentia  praestantius.  D.  II,  30  :  quo  genere  nihil 
adrogantius.  D.  II,  66  :  nihil  nobilius  illo.  D.  II,  102  : 
nihil  beneficentia  praestantius.  D.  II,  147  :  neque  coniectura 
quicquam  ineertius.  N.  I,  51  :  qua  nihil  beatius.  N.  I,  77  : 
homine  pulcrius  nihil.  N.  I,  97  :  elephanto  nulla  prudentior. 
N.  I,  121  :  nihil  virtute  amabilius.  A^.  II,  16  :  qua  nihil  prae- 
stantius.        iV.  II,  21  :  nihil  mundo  melius.         N.  II,  38  :  nihil 


48  Universal  Negative  Sentences. 

inente  et  ratione  melius.  N.  II,  39  :  nihil  virtute  melius.  N, 
II,  45  :  nihil  eo  praestantius.  N.  II,  46  :  qua  nihil  melius. 
N.  II,  46  :  mundo  nihil  melius.  N.  II,  47  :  quo  nihil  aptius. 
N.  II,  76  :  nihil  praeclarius  administratione.  N.  II,  77  :  nihil 
praestantius   deo.  N.    II,   80 :    nihil   nee   mains   nee   melius 

mundo.  N.  II,  104 :  quo  spectaculo  nihil  admirabilius,  nihil 
pulcrius.  N.  II,  133  :  quibus  nihil  melius.  N.  II,  142  : 
qua  nihil  callidius.  N.  II,  147  :  qua  ne  quidem  res  ulla  prae- 
stantior.  N.  Ill,  20  :  quo  nihil  melius.  N.  Ill,  20  :  deo 
nihil  praestantius.        N.  Ill,  21  :  nihil  mundo  melius.        N.  Ill, 

22  :  nihil  mundo  melius,   (also  found  in  N.  Ill,  23.)  N.  Ill, 

23  :  nihil  est  eo  pulcrius.  A.  II,  11  :  nihil  illo  mitius.  A. 
II,  31  :  nihil  luce  dulcius.         A.  II,  90  :  quo  certius  nihil.        A. 

II,  143 :  quo  nihil  acutius  nihil  politius.  L.  I,  6  :  quibus 
nihil  ieiunius.  L.  I,  23  :  nihil  ratione  melius.  L.  I,  58  : 
qua  nihil  uberius.  L.  II,  6  :  hac  nihil  amoenius.  L.  II, 
36  :  nihil  melius  illis  mysteriis.  L,  III,  19:  nihil  urbe,  nihil 
domo  sua  dulcius.  Z,.  Ill,  33  :  nihil  voce  melius.  Or.  2, 
7  :  quo  nihil  praestantius.  Or.  7,  23  :  hoc  nee  gravior  quis- 
quam.  Or.  15,  47:  nihil  feracius  ingeniis.  Or.  26,  90: 
quo  nihil  urbanius.  Or.  31,  109:  quibus  nihil  praestantius. 
Or.  59,  200:  qua  nihil  celerius.  Or.  67,  225  :  qua  non  potest 
esse  brevior.  Brut.  39,  144  :  nihil  Crasso  copiosius.  Brut. 
57,  207  :  quo  nihil  vitiosius.  Brut.  75,  262  :  nihil  pura  et 
illustri  brevitate  dulcius.  Brut.  85,  293  :  quo  nihil  pictius. 
De  Or.  I,  28,  128  :  nihil  rarius  perfecto  oratore.  De  Or.  I, 
40,  183:  quo  indicium  gravius  nullum.  De  Or.  I,  53,  229: 
illo  nemo  neque  integrior  neque  sanctior.  De  Or.  II,  60, 
244  :  Granio  nemo  dicacior.  De  Or,  III,  15,  56  :  qua  nihil 
iucundius.       Ad  Quint.  I,  3,  4  :  quo  nihil  acerbius.        Ad  Quint. 

III,  I,  6,  19  :  nihil  puero  illo  suavius.         Ad  Quint.   Ill,  i,  7, 

24  :  nihil  illo  turpius.  Ad  Quint.  Ill,  2,  2  :  nihil  .sermone 
clarius.  Ad  Quint.  111,4,  i  •  nihil  accusatore  Lutulo  scriptori- 
busque  infantius ;  nihil  illo  consilio  sordidius.  Verr.  IV, 
55,  122  :  nihil  ea  pictura  nobilius.  Verr.  V,  26,  66:  qua  nihil 
victoria  dulcius.         Phil.  II,  46,  119  :    hoc  mains  nihil.         Phil. 


Universal  Negative  Sentences.  49 

III,  6,  16  :  nihil  illo  contemptius,  qui.  Phil.  Ill,  14,  36  : 
nihil  detestabilius  dedecore,  nihil  foedius  servitute.         Phil.  V, 

I,  I  :  nihil  longius  his  Kalendis  Januariis.  Phil.  V,  18,  50: 
nihil  republica  carius,  nihil  vestra  auctoritate  gravius,  nihil 
iudicio  optatius,  nihil  vera  gloria  dulcius.  Phil.  XII,  10,  24  : 
nemo  me  minus  timidus,  nemo  cautior.  The  phrase  minus 
timidus  is  equivalent  in  thought  to  audacior  or  fortior,  so  that 
the  adverb  minus  has  no  effect  on  the  construction.  Phil. 
XIII,  1,2:  nihil  hoc  cive,  nihil  hoc  homine  taetrius.  Cluent. 
48,  133  :  neque  hoc  homine  sanctior  quicquam.         Leg.  Agra. 

II,  4:  ornatius  illo  nihil.  Quinct.  31,  97:  quibus  propior 
P.  Quinctio  nemo.  Sex.  Rose.  28,  78  :  hoc  nihil  acerbius. 
Q.  Rose.  17,  52  :  quo  nihil  captiosius  neque  indignius.  Deiot. 
12,  34  :  nullus  locus  rostris  clarior.  Piso,  8,  17  :  quo  foedius 
nee  quisquam.  Or.  Post.  Red.  {in  Sen.)  1,1:  qua  nihil  iucun- 
dius.  Sest.  69,  147  :  qua  nihil  sanctius.  Plane.  25,  60  : 
honore  nihil  amplius.  Mur.  17,  36  :  nihil  incertius  volgo, 
nihil  obscurius  voluntate  hominum,  nihil  fallacius  ratione  tota 
comitiorum.  Mur.  40,  86  :  qua  nulla  res  potior.  Rab.  Post. 
1,1:  nihil  sapientius  Postumo  ;  nihil  hoc  amentius.  Rab. 
Post.  3,  5  :  nihil  illo  blandius,  nihil  hoc  benignius.  Rab.  Post. 
17,  48  :  quo  nemo  melior.  Top.  25,  95  :  lege  firmius  nihil. 
Lig.  12,  37  :  nulla  nee  admirabilior  nee  gratior  misericordia. 
Frag.  Philos.  /^  V,  81  :  qua  nulla  maior. 

Publilius  Syrus. 

53  :  Amico  firmo  nil  melius. 

Nepos. 

Milt.  5,  5  :  qua  pugna  nihil  nobilius.  Alcib.  1,1:  nihil  illo 
excellentius.  De  Reg.  i,  4:  illo  nemo  fortior.  Att.  i,  4  : 
nemo  perpetua  vita  carior.  Att.    18,  4  :    quibus  libris  nihil 

dulcius. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  2,4:  quo  neque  melius  neque  amplius  aliud. 

There  are  some  other  sentences,  mostly  conditional,  whose  value 


50  Universal  Negative  Sentences. 

is  that  of  a  universal  negative.     Naturally,  here  too,  the  second 
element  of  the  comparison  is  in  the  ablative  case. 

Terence. 

Phorm.  227  :  nunc  ipsast  opus,  ea  aut,  si  quid  potest,  meliore 
et  callidiore. 

Catullus. 

82,  2  :  Aut  aliud  si  quid  carius  est  oculis  eripere  ei  noli 
multo  quod  carius  illi  est  oculis  sen  quid  carius  est  oculis. 

There  are  several  exceptions  to  the  principle  stated  in  the  above 
category  : 

Plautus. 

Bacch.  41  :  Miserius  nil  est  quam  mulier.  Most.  544  :  Nil 
est  miserius  quam  animus  hominis  conscius.  This  may  be  ac- 
counted for  by  the  genitive  that  modifies  the  second  element  (see 
Category  VI,  B;.  Poen,  825  :  Neque  periurior  neque  peior  alter 
usquamst  gentium  quam  erus  mens  est.  Pseud.  925  :  Num- 

quam  ille  potior  Harpax  quam  ego. 

Terence. 

Phorm.  808  :  ut  proprior  illi,  quam  ego  sum  ac  tu,  nemost. 

Here  the  comparative  adjective  is  modified  by  a  dative  (see 
Category  VII)  :  yet  this  has  not  always  the  power  to  make  these 
universal  negatives  take  a  ^z^^w-construction,  e.  g.^  Cicero,  Fam. 
Ill,  8,  9;  Prov.Cons.  15,  37,  and  other  passages. 

Cicero. 

Fam.  IV,  9,  3  :  miserius  nihil  quam  ipsa  victoria,  quae.  The 
second  term  of  the  comparison  is  here  modified  by  an  adjective 
clause  (Category  VI,  A).  But  even  under  these  circumstances  the 
ablative  sometimes  appears,  e.  g.,  Cic.  Att.  IV,  7,  i.  Fam.  V,  2, 
4 :  nihil  aptius  ad  delectationem  lectoris  quam  temporum  varietates 
fortunaeque  vicissitudines.  The  second  element  is  here  modified 
by  the  genitive  of  a  noun  (Category  VI,  B)  :  but  even  then  we 
sometimes  find  an  ablative  {Mur.  17,  36  ;  Lael.  49).  Att.  IV, 
8a,  2  :  nihil  venustius  quam  ilia  tua  pegmata.  Att.  XIII,  21,7: 
si  quid  hoc  ad  rem  evyevco-repos  est  etiam  quam  pater.     The  Greek 


Universal  Negative  Sentences;  51 

comparative  may  be  the  element  that  causes  the  appearance  of 
quam.  It  could  not  be  followed  by  an  ablative  in  Greek  :  it  can- 
not have  a  genitive  in  Latin  at  this  period  :  the  case  that  it  could 
have  in  either  language  is  used.  Dom.  32,  87  :  nihil  ad  laudem 
illustrius  quam  calamitas  ipsa.  This  may  be  due  to  the  preposi- 
tional phrase  that  modifies  the  comparative,  but  it  is  not  at  all 
clear.  Lig.  11,  33  :  quodvis  exilium  his  optatius  quam  patria, 
quam  domus,  quam  di  penates.  This  ^2^^w-construction  is  certainly 
due  to  the  dative  his  that  modifies  optatius  (see  Category  VII). 
T.  IV,  82  :  nihil  aut  mains  aut  utilius  quam  haec,  quae.  There 
are  two  reasons  for  quam  here,  viz  :  a)  a  following  relative  clause 
(Category  VI,  A)  ;  b)  an  oblique  case  of  a  neuter  is  impossible 
(Bennett,  Grammar,  §  236,  2).  O.  I,  56  :  nihil  amabilius  nee 
copulatius  quam  morum  similitudo  bonorum.  Here  the  influence 
of  a  modifying  genitive  leads  to  the  use  of  quam,  (Category  VI,  B. ) 
Lael.  50 :  nihil  appetentius,  similium  sui  nee  rapacius  quam 
natura.  De  Or.  II,  82,  334  :  in  suadendo  nihil  est  optabilius 
quam  dignitas.  De  Or.  Ill,  60,  224  :  nam  ad  vocem  obtinen- 
dam  nihil  est  utilius  quam  crebra  mutatio  :  nihil  perniciosius  quam 
effusa   sine   intermissione   contentio.  Verr.    II,    107 :    nemo 

Sthenio  inimicior  quam  hie  C.  Claudius.  In  these  four  examples 
the  comparative  is  modified,  by  a  genitive,  by  phrases,  by  a 
dative.  Phil.  IV,  5,  12  :  nullus  ei  Indus  iucundior  quam  cruor, 
quam  caedes,  quam  ante  oculos  trucidatio  civium.  In  the  first 
term  of  the  comparison  we  have  the  comparative  modified  by  a 
dative  ei  (Category  VII)  ;  in  the  second  term  the  noun  is  modi- 
fied by  a  phrase.  Both  these  circumstances  would  naturally  pro- 
duce quam,. 

Publilius   Syrus. 

438  :  nulla  hominum  maior  poena  quam  necessitas. 
The  first  term  of  the  comparison  is  modified  by  a  noun  in  the 
genitive  (Category  VI,  B). 


52  Comparative  in  Rhetorical  Questions. 


XVI. 

When  the  absolute  negative  idea  is  expressed  in  the  form  of  a 
rhetorical  question,  the  effect  on  the  construction  is  just  the  same 
as  tho  nemo,  nihil  (see  Category  XV)  were  used  i.  e.,  the  second 
element  of  the  comparison  is  put  in  the  ablative. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  153:  Qui  me  alter  audacior  homo?  Amph.  818: 
Quid  ilia  impudente  audacius.  Amph.  1046  :  Qui  me  alter 
miserior  ?  Asin.  557:  Qui  mest  vir  fortior?  Asin.  717: 
Quid  homini  Salute  melius  ?  Capt.    540  :    Quis   homost  me 

miserior  ?  M.  G.  307  :  Quid  peius  muliere  aut  audacius  ? 
Most.  256:  Quid  ilia  peius  quicquam  muliere?  Poen.  1270: 
Quibus  melius  est?  Pseud.  541  :  Quis  me  audacior ?  Rud. 
520:  Quis  me  miserior?  Rud.  1281  :  Quis  mest  miserior? 
Rud.  1 191  :  Quis  mest  fortunatior?  Trin.  692:  Quis  me  im- 
probior  ?  Trin.  929  :  Quis  homost  me  insipientior,  qui  .  .  ? 
This  sentence  has  the  ablative  me  despite  the  modifying  ^2^/-clause. 

Terence. 

Heaut.  2^^\  Quid  senenostro  miserius?  Eun.  1031  :  Ecquis 
me  fortunatior?  Hec.  491  :  me  qui  sit  fortunatior?  Hec. 
848  :  Quis  me  est  fortunatior  venustatisque  adeo  plenior  ?  Here 
the  genitive  that  modifies  the  comparative  in  the  second  part  of 
the  sentence  has  no  effect  (see  Category  VI,  B). 

Lucretius. 

II,  1035  :  Quid  magis  his  rebus  miserabile? 

Catullus. 

31,  7  :  O  quid  solutis  est  beatius  curis?  62,  30  :  Quid  felici 
optatius  hora  ?  107,7:  Quis  me  uno  vivit  felicior,  aut  magis 
hac  res  optandas  vita  dicere  quis  poterit?  This  last  sentence 
seems  to  violate  the  principle  laid  down  (Category  IX)  for  com- 
paratives formed  with  magis. 


Comparative  in  Rhetorical  Questions,  53 

Cicero. 

A.  II,  35:  quid  eo  levius?  A.  II,  82:  quid  sole  maius? 
F.  I,  41  :  quid  eo  miserius?  F.  II,  63  :  quis  aut  hoc  miserior 
aut  superiore  illo  beatior?  F.  Ill,  76:  quid  philosophia  magis 
colendum  aut  quid  virtute  divinius  ?  We  have  here  again  an 
ablative   after   magis    (Category   IX).  T.    I,    97  :    quis  me 

beatior?  T.  II,  57  :  quid  est  fletu  muliebri  viro  turpius?  The 
comparative  adjective  is  modified  by  a  dative  (Category  VII)  but 
still  we  have  an  ablative.  T.  Ill,  27  :  Tarquinio  quid  impu- 

dentius?  T.  V,  34:  quis  illo  viro  dignior?  T,  V,  50:  quo 
quid  perversius?  T.  V,  67  :  quid  sagaci  ac  bona  mente  melius? 
T.   V,    72:  quid   eo  praestantius  ?  T.   V,    77:  quae  barbaria 

India  vastior  aut  agrestior?  T.  V,  80  :  quid  ea  foedius?  T. 

V,  103:  quid  hoc  levius?  T.  V,  105:  quid  dulcius  otio 
litterato?  O.  II,  5:  quid  optabilius  sapientia?  O.  II,  34: 
quo  quis  versutior  et  callidior,  hoc  invisior  et  suspectior?  O. 
II,  66:  quid  eloquentia  praestabilius  ?  O.  II,  73:  qua  peste 
quae  potest  maior?  O.  Ill,  105  :  An  est  uUum  maius  malum 
turpitudine?  L.  I,  22:  quid  ratione  divinius?  L.  I,  46: 
quo   quid   stultius?  L.    I,    51  :    quid    abiectius   tarditate   et 

stultitia?  L.  I,  51  :  quid  foedius  avaritia?  L.  I,  60:  quid 
eo  beatius?  L.  II,  42  :  quo  quid  praeclarius?  L.  Ill,  i  : 
quid  elegantia  tua  dignius  ?  L.  Ill,  44:  quo  quid  iniustius? 
A^.  I,  I  :  quid  temeritate  turpius  ?  A^.  I,  23:  miserius  stultitia 
quid?  N.  I,  26:  quid  interius  mente?  N.  I,  121:  quid 
praestantius  bonitate  et  beneficentia?  N.  II,  5:  qui  hoc  illo 
evidentius?  N.  II,  16:  quid  homine  melius.  N.  Ill,  24: 
quarum  reversione  et  motu  quid  constantius  ?  The  second  terms 
of  the  comparison  are  here  modified  by  the  genitive,  still  they  are 
in  the  ablative.  N.  Ill,  74  :  quid  hoc  homine  soUertius  ?  D. 
I,  56  :  quo  somnio  quid  certius?  D.  I,  58  :  quid  hoc  somnio 
divinius?  D.  I,  106:  quid  illo  auspicio  divinius?  Z>.  II, 
79:  quid  hoc  tristius?  D.  II,  127:  quid  inconstantius  deo? 
C.  28  :  quid  iucundius  senectute  stipata  studiis  iuventutis  ? 
Despite  the  fact  that  the  second  element  of  the  comparison  is 
modified   (Category  VI,  C)  we  find  the  ablative.         C  29  :    quo 


54  Comparative  in  Rhetorical  Questions. 

opere  quid  praeclarius?  C.  53:  qua  quid  laetius,  pulcrius? 
R.  I,  52:  virtute  guberriante  rem  publicain  quid  praeclarius? 
The  ablative  here  is  modified  ;  we  should  ordinarily  expect  quam 
(see  Category  VI,  C).  R.  I,  71  :  Quis  te  florentior?  R.  Ill, 
47  :  quid  optumo  melius?  Att.  II,  i,  8  :  quid  impudentius 
publicanis  renuntiantibus  ?  Att.  IV,  6,  i  :  quid  foedius  nostra 
vita,  praecipue  mea?  Att.  IV,  8,  b,  2:  quid  illo  miserius? 
Att.  VIII,  2,  3:  hoc  miserius,  hoc  turpius  quidquam?  Att. 
VIII,  3,  3  :  quid  foedius,  quid  perturbatius  hoc  ab  urbe  discessu? 
Att.  IX,  5,  2:  quibus  maioraquae?  Att.  IX,  10,  3:  quid 
eorum  victoria  crudelius,  quid  f unestius  ?  Despite  the  genitive 
eorum  the  ^«<^w-construction  does  not  appear.  Att.  X,  12a, 
i:    quis    me   infelicior,    turpior  ?  Att.    XI,    2,    3:    quis   me 

miserior  uno?  Att.  XIII,  38,  i:  hoc  quidquam  impurius? 
Att.  XV,  29,  I  :  quid  mihi  meis  iucundius?  Tho  iucundius  is 
modified  by  a  dative,  the  ablative  appears  in  the  second  part  of  the 
comparison  (Category  VII).  Ad  Brut.  I,  16,  i:  quae  morte 
qua   perniciosior?  Fam.    IV,    8,    2:     quae    domestica   sede 

iucundior?  Fam.  IX,  21,  3:  quid  iis  improbius?  De  Or, 
II,  3,  10:  Quid  tua  oratione  subtilius,  ornatius?  De  Or.  II, 
8,  34  :  quod  carmen  artificiosa  verborum  conclusione  aptius? 
De  Or.  II,  61,  249  :  Quid  hoc  Naevio  ignavius?  De  Or.  Ill, 
8,  29  :  Quid  iucundius  auribus  nostris  huius  oratione  Catuli  ? 
For  two  reasons  we  should  not  expect  the  ablative  here — there  is  a 
dative  modifying  the  comparative  adjective,  (Category  VII)  and 
a  genitive  modifying  the  second  term  of  the  comparison  (Category 
VI,  B).  De  Or.  Ill,  49,  187  :  quid  disputatione  ista  elegantius 

aut  subtilius.  De  Or.   Ill,   60,    225  :    Quid   vicissitudine  et 

varietate  et  commutatione  aptius?  Or.  10,  34:  Quis  te  aut 
sanctior  aut  dulcior?  Or.  48,  159  :  Quid  hoc  elegantius,  quod. 
Even  tho  we  have  a  ^z^^^-clause,  the  ablative  appears  (Category 
VI,  A).  Or.  51,    172  :  Quis  doctior,  quis  acutior,  quis  acrior 

Aristotele?  Or.  56,  190  :  quo  quid  turpius?  Invent.  I,  38, 
69  :  Quid  tanta  Thebanorum  gloria,  tam  claro  atque  exornato 
tropaeo  carius  aut  antiquius?  Brut.  17,  65  :  quis  illo  gravior  ? 
Brut.  31,   121  :  Quis  Aristotele  nervosior,  Theophrasto  dulcior? 


Comparative  in  Rhetorical  Questions.  55 

Brut.  31,  121  :  Quis  uberior  Platone?  Harus.  18,  39  :  Quae 
maior  poena  furore  atque  dementia.  Dom.  29,  76  :  Quid  te 
dementius?  Cat.  IV,  6,  11  :  Quis  me  mitior?  Piso,  21,  49  : 
Quid  hoc  turpius?  Piso,  40,  97:  Quis  te  miserior,  quis  te 
damnatior,  qui  ?  The  adjective  ^2^2-clause  does  not  affect  the  con- 
struction that  would  usually  occur  in  rhetorical  questions. 
Piso,  Frag.^  6:  Quid  illo  inertius?  Prov.  Co7is.  8,  19  :  Quis 
plenior   inimicorum   C.    Mario?  Genitives   modifying   either 

term  of  the  comparison  generally  cause  the  appearance  of  a  quam- 
construction  (Category  VI,  B).  Inimicorum  has  failed  to  do  so 
here.  Prov.  Cons.  12,  29  :  Quid  illis  terris  asperius,  quid  in- 
cultius  oppidis,  quid  nationibus  immanius,  quid  tot  victoriis 
praestabilius,  quid  Oceano  longius?  Place.  23,  56:  Quid  hoc 
impudentius?  Flacc.  39,  97:  Quid  hoc  miserius?  Phil.  I, 
4,  10:  quo  quid  gravius?  Phil.  I,  11,  27:  Quid  hac  postula- 
tione  aequius.  Phil.  II,  13,  33:  Quid  beatius  illis,  quos  tu? 
Here  again  a  ^2^/-clause  modifies  the  ablative  contrary  to  rule 
(Category  VI,  A).  Phil.  II,  34,  86:  Quid  hoc  turpius? 
Phil.  Ill,  6,  15:  Quis  hoc  adulescente  castior,  quis  modestior? 
Phil.  Ill,  6,  15  :  Quis  illo,  qui  male  dicit,  impurior?  Again 
the  ablative  is  modified  by  a  ^«2*-clause  (Category  VI,  A). 
Phil.  VII,  3,  9  :  Quid  inconstantia,  levitate,  mobilitate,  turpius? 
Phil.  VIII,  1,4:  Quo  quid  absurdius?  Phil.  X,  10,  22  :  Quid 
ilia    taetrius    belua  ?  Phil.    XIII,    8,    17:     Quis   fortunatior 

lyepido,  quis  eodem  sanior?  Verr.  I,  44,   112:    Quid  natura 

nobis  iucundius,  quid  carius?  The  dative  nobis  modifying 
iucundius  would  usually  lead  to  quam  natura.  Verr.  Ill,  62, 

144  :  quid  est  quod  possit  quisquam  manifestius  hoc  desi- 
derare?  Verr.  Ill,  77,  178:    illo  quicquam  certius?  Verr. 

Ill,  86,  200:  Quid  hoc  indignius?  Verr.  IV,  32,  71  :  Quid 

hoc  indignius  ?  Verr.  V,  7,  16  :  Kcquid  hoc  tota  Sicilia  clarius, 

ecquid   indignius,   ecquid   manifestius?  Suit.    26,   72:    Quis 

P.  Sulla  mitior,  quis  misericordior ?  Leg.  Agra.  I,  6,  19: 
Quid  illis  clementius,  qui  ?  The  ablative  illis  is  modified  by  a  qui- 
clause  :  we  should  expect  quam  illi.  Cluent.  38,  107  :  Quis 
P.  Octavio  Balbo  ingenio  prudentior  iure  peritior  ?     The  presence 


56  Comparative  in  Rhetorical  Questions. 

of  one  ablative  ingenio,  iure,  in  the  sentence  does  not  prevent  the 
use  of  the  comparative  ablative  here  as  we  should  expect  (Cate- 
gory X).  Marc,  i,  4:  Quis  illo  praestantior ?  Mur.  31, 
66 :  Quis  C.  Laelio  comior  ?  quis  illo  gravior,  sapientior  ? 
Deiot.  6,  16  :  Quis  consideratior  illo?  Mil.  2,  5  :  Quid  nobis 
duobus  laboriosius?  Mil.  22,  60  :  quid  hac  quaestione  certius  ? 
Mil.  22,  60:  quid  hac  quaestione  integrius,  quid  incorruptius ? 
^i^'  33.  90-  Quo  quid  raiserius?  Imp.  Pomp.  10,  28  :  Quis 
hoc  homine  scientior  ?  Lael.  42  :  Quis  clarior  Themistocle, 
quis  potentior?  Philos.  Frag.  V,  25  :  Quid  aut  Herodoto 
dulciusaut  Thucydide  gravius,  aut  Philisto  brevius  aut  Theopompo 
acrius  aut  Kphoro  mitius?  Philos.  Frag.  V,  56:  Quis  te 
pressior  ? 

The  exceptions  to  this  principle  are  quite  numerous,  viz  : 

Plautus. 
Mil.  Gl.  314  :  Quis  magis  dels  inimicis  natus  quam  tu  atque 
iratis  ?  Here  the  comparative  is  in  an  oblique  case,  the  compari- 
son is  between  two  persons,  one  of  which  is  in  the  nominative  ; 
hence  the  other  must  be  in  the  nominative  and  joined  to  the  first 
by  quam.  Note  also  that  the  comparative  is  formed  by  magis 
(Category  IX).  Mil.  Gl.  615  :  Quis  homo  sit  magis  mens 
quam  tu's?  This  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  the  comparative  is 
expressed  by  m,agis.  It  seems  quite  within  the  region  of  possi- 
bility to  consider  this  a  comparative  of  meus  which  has  here  a 
peculiar  significance  of  *  after  my  own  heart  '.^ 

Varro. 

L.   L.  VIII,   67  :    Quid   similius  quam   Gens,    Mens,    Dens  ? 

L.L.  X,  7  :  Quid  similius  indiligenti  quam  duo  verba  haec  Suis 

et  Suis  ? 

Cicero. 

De  Or.  II,  8,  34  :  Quid  subtilius  quam  crebrae  acutaeque  sen- 
tentiae  ?  Quid  admirabilius  quam  res  splendore  illustrata  verbo- 
rum  ?  Quid  plenius  quam  omni  genere  cumulata  oratio  ?  The 
complicated  character  of  the  second  term  of  the  comparison 
seems  to  be  sufficient  reason  for  using  quam  in  each  case.     If  we 

^  See  Lorenz  and  Tyrell,  ad  loc. 


Comparative  in  Rhetorical  Questions,  57 

had  the  comparative  followed  by  rebus,  as  we  should  be  justified 
in  expecting,  we  should  then  have  two  ablatives,  rebus  and 
splendore,  in  the  same  sentence,  bearing  widely  different  relations 
to  the  verbal  idea  of  that  sentence.  This  is  avoided  in  Latin. 
The  same  remarks  will  apply  to  genere,  oratione.  The  use  of 
quam  in  the  first  clause  may  be  by  anticipation  of  the  quam  in 
the  following  clauses. 

Phil.  Ill,  3,  6  :  Quis  unus  fortior,  quis  amicior  reipublicae 
quam  legio  Martia  universa  ?  Here  the  comparative  adjective  is 
modified  by  a  dative,  reipublicae  (Category  VII).  Mur.  2,  3  : 
Quis  mihi  coniunctior  quam  is,  cui  ?  Here  the  comparative  adjec- 
tive is  modified  by  a  dative  mihi,  and  the  second  element  of  the 
comparison  is  modified  by  a  ^?^2-clause. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

Ill,  22  :  Quid  insuavius  quam  clamor  in  exordio  causae? 

The  foregoing  illustrations  of  the  usage  in  rhetorical  questions 
show  that  in  very  nearly  95  %  of  all  the  instances,  the  comparative 
is  followed  by  the  ablative.  Only  eight  exceptions  are  found, 
and  for  five  of  these  an  explanation  has  been  offered.  It  is  to  be 
noted  how  frequently  the  previous  categories  are  broken  down  by 
the  influence  of  the  absolute  negative  and  its  equivalent,  the 
rhetorical  question.  Another  point  worthy  of  attention  is  the 
number  of  times  a  neuter  is  used  when  the  comparison  was  really 
between  masculines,  e.  g.  '  Quid  Petronio  fuit  stultius  ?  '  would 
be  the  regular  way  of  stating  Petronius'  inferiority  in  sense. 

The  position  of  the  ablative  of  comparison  before  its  compara- 
tive is  so  common,  that  one  is  almost  tempted  to  use  this  as  the 
one  important  differentiation  ;  but  this  seems  to  be  too  shifting  a 
standard.  We  should  be  settling  one  question  in  terms  of  another 
which  is  no  more  fixed  than  the  one  with  which  we  start.  This 
arrangement  cannot  be  looked  upon  as  more  than  a  coincidence, 
— not  due  to  any  well-defined  principle  of  cause  and  effect.  *  In 
using  the  ablative  put  it  before  its  comparative  :  if  the  second 
element  of  the  comparison  is  put  before  its  comparative,  use  the 
ablative  '  approaches  much  too  closely  the  vicious  circle  to  b*^ 


fTBRARp 

^  OF  THE 


UNIVERSITY 


58  Phrase  Summed  up  by  a  Pronoun. 

of  any  value  to  us.  Sorae^  actually  endeavor  to  make  this  the 
distinction  between  the  two  idioms,  and  it  has  been  so  generally 
noticed  in  discussions  of  the  construction  that  Kellerhoff  ^  has  seen 
fit  to  make  a  complete  collection  for  Plautus  and  Terence.  His 
conclusion  is  "In  ablativi  comparativi,  quae dicitur,  constructione, 
ablativus  ante  comparativum  plerumque  ponitur." — based  on  the 
proportion  60  :  15.  On  examination  it  is  found  that  the  propor- 
tion will  be  very  nearly  the  same  for  the  whole  period  covered  by 
this  investigation, 

XVII. 

It  is  often  desirable  to  sum  up  a  following  infinitive  or  other 
modal  construction,  that  takes  quam,  by  a  neuter  pronoun  ;  this 
pronoun  is  put  in  the  ablative  after  a  comparative.^  Such  a  con- 
struction occurs  nearly  always  in  rhetorical  questions,  and  only 

in  Cicero  : 

Cicero. 

Att.  VIII,  9,  3  :  quid  hoc  miserius  quam  quaerere  ?  D.  I,  87  : 
quid  hoc  turpius  quam  quod  censet?  De  Or.  I,  37,  169  :  quid 
hoc  turpius  quam  eum  qui  .  .  ?  Quinct.  2,8:  quid  hoc  iniquius 
aut  indignius  quam  me  dicere?  Phil.  XII,  4,  9  :  quid  hoc 
iniustius  quam  nos  cernere?  Verr.   IV,   35,   77:    quid   hoc 

clarius  quam  matronas  convenisse. 

The  two  following  examples  are  negative  statements,  not 
rhetorical  questions  : 

De  Or.  II,  9,  38  :  hoc  certius  nihil  quam  quod  artes  praestare 
possunt.  ^.  I,  45  :  neque  hoc  quidquam  esse  turpius  quam 
praecurrere. 

To  this  principle  there  is  one  exception  : 

Cicero. 

Or.  Post.  Red.  {in  Sen.)  10,  25:  quid  gloriosius  quam  hoc 
senatum  iudicasse. 

1  Fischer  1.  c,  p.  764:  obs.  15A. 

2  "  De  Collocatione  Verborum  "  Studemund's  Studien,  vol.  II,  p.  80,  |  8. 
'  Fischer,  p.  767,  G.  4. 


Proverbial  Expressions.  59 


XVIII. 

Phrases  that  have  the  flavor  of  the  speech  of  the  people,  that 
seem  to  have  become  crystallized  into  proverbial  forms  and  values, 
generally  have  the  ablative/  These  have  probably  arisen,  by 
extension,  from  what  was  originally  a  very  limited  and  definite 
c\2iss— Jig 2ir a  etymologica — ^  the  very  kind  of  expression  that 
would  find  favor  with  a  primitive  people,  when  they  desired  em- 
phasis. Many  instances  that  might  properly  be  classified  here, 
have  already  appeared  under  *'  universal  negatives",  e.  g.,  7iullus 
me  est  hodie  Poenus  Poenior.  Those  already  quoted  under  an- 
other head  will  be  omitted  from  this  category.  The  examples 
appear  in  almost  every  author  down  to  the  Church  Fathers,  but 
decidedly  more  occur  in  Plautus,  Catullus,  and  Cicero's  Letters 
than  in  any  other  portion  of  the  literature  of  the  same  extent. 


In  a  few  cases  we  find  the  adjective  compared  with  itself  or 
the  substantive  from  which  it  is  derived. 

Plautus. 

Cist.  644  :  O  Salute  mea  salus  salubrior. 

Here  some  editors^  would  include  Captivi,  392,  Qui  me  honore 
honestiorem  semper  fecit.  This  view  would  make  honore  a  com- 
parative ablative.  If  we  compare  this  with  ibid.  247,  Ne  me 
secus  honore  honestes  quam  quom  servibas  mihi,  we  are  led  to 
the  conclusion  that  honore  bears  the  same  relation  to  honestiorem 
fecit  as  it  does  to  honestes.  The  first  is  simply  a  periphrasis  for 
the  second.  This  conclusion  is  strengthened  by  the  appearance 
of  the  same  phrase  ho?iore  honestes  in  1.  356,  where  it  is  put  in  the 

^  For  a  general  discussion  of  proverbial  expressions  see  Otto,  '  Sprich- 
worter  der  Romer'.  He  cites  many  of  the  ablatives  that  appear  in  this 
category, 

2  Wolfflin,  Archiv  fiir  Lat.  Lex.  VI,  p.  448  ;  Landgraf,  Acta  Krlang.  II,  65. 

'  Hallidie  ;  Tyrrell,  ad  M.  G.,  620  ;  Klmer. 


'6o  Proverbial  Expressions, 

mouth  of  the  same  character  that  spoke  392.  We  find,  moreover, 
instances  in  plenty  to  support  the  use  of  an  ablative  of  means, 
where  the  ablative  is  from  a  noun  which  is  to  be  referred  to  the 
same  root  and  fundamental  idea  as  the  verb.  From  the  immedi- 
ate context  of  the  passages  quoted  we  find  (422)  laudetur 
laudibus. 

B. 

The  comparative  adjective  is  followed  by  some  form  of  itself 
in  the  ablative  as  the  second  member  of  the  comparison. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  907  :  stultior  stultissimo.         Capt.   150  :  unico  magis 

unicust. 

Varro. 

L.  L.  9,  72  :  lusco  magis  luscus. 

C. 

The  comparative  adjective  is  repeated  with  a  noun  or  pronoun » 

Plautus. 

Amph.  446  :  nil  hoc  simili  similius.         Asin.   614 :    O  melle 

dulci  dulcior.         Aul.  600  :  citis  quadrigis  citius.     Here  we  find 

an  ablative,  tho  adverbs  generally  take  quam  (Category  XXII). 

Capt.  644  :  nil  magis  hoc  certo  certius.  True.  37 1  :  hoc  melle 

dulci  dulcius. 

Catullus. 

22,  14:  infaceto  infacetior  rure.  27,  4  :  Ebrioso  acino  ebri- 
osioris.  39,  16  :  risu  inepto  res  ineptior  nulla  99,  2  :  dulci 
dulcius  ambrosia.         99,  14  :  tristi  tristius  elleboro. 


Next  to  this  exact  form  of  repitition,  comes  a  class  of  ex- 
pressions in  which  a  synonym  is  used  for  one  word  or  the  other 
(by  the  figure  that  the  Germans  call  '  Permutation  '  ^). 

*  Landgraf,  1.  c,  pp.  27,  51,  53,  59  and  especially  61,  \  23. 


Proverbial  Expressions.  6i 

Plautus. 

Bacch.  122:  stultior  es  barbaro  poticio   "  obschon  man  nicht 

gezwungen  vverdeti  kana  '  barbarus'  als  Synonymum  von  'stultus  ' 

zu  fassen  ".^ 

Cicero. 

Fam.  VI,  18,  5  :  otium  orani  desertissima  regione  mains,  where 
disertissima  can  readily  mean  otiosissima. 

E. 

In  the  other  cases  the  comparison  is  made  with  what  must 
have  been  conceived  as  possessing  the  very  highest  degree  of  the 
special  quality  expressed  by  the  adjective.  The  Roman  idiom 
here  was  different  from  ours,  but  we  should  not  hesitate,  for  an 
instant,  to  draw  a  parallel  between  '  clear  as  crystal  *,  *  black  as  a 
coal ' ,  and  comparative  ablative  phrases  like  luce  clarior.  The 
adjectives  are,  in  nearly  every  instance,  those  that  express  com- 
mon qualities  ;  *  braver '  *  sadder '  *  sweeter ' ,  while  the  nouns  with 
which  the  comparison  is  drawn  are  natural  phenomena,  (^sun, 
wind,  etc. )  or  human  attributes  {life,  eyes,  etc.).  The  type  extends 
through  every  period  of  the  literature.  The  character  of  the  ex- 
pressions, their  terseness,  the  alliteration  that  appears  so  often, — 
all  point  to  an  early  origin  and  a  continuance  in  the  spoken  lan- 
guage. The  instances,  where  the  ablative  was  used,  must  have 
been  much  more  frequent  than  we  should  have  any  reason  to  be- 
lieve, were  we  to  be  guided  solely  by  extant  Latinity.  Had  the 
idiom  not  been  conspicuous  in  the  spoken  language,  Priscian  would 
scarcely  have  called  the  ablative  the  *  comparative  case  '.^  Such  a 
view  as  this,  however,  does  not  warrant  our  concluding  that  the 
ablative  appeared  in  the  spoken  language  in  those  categories  from 
which  investigation  proves  it  to  have  been  excluded  in  literature. 

Ennius. 

Fab.  146  :  melius  virtute  ius. 

^  Wolfflin,  1.  c,  454. 
2  Keil,  II,  187. 


62  Proverbial  Expressions. 

Plautus. 

Most.  291  :  Fulcrum  ornatum  turpes  mores  peius  caeno  con- 
linunt.  The  same  sentence  is  found  in  Poen.  306.  This  fact  has 
led  some  editors  to  athetize  the  line  in  one  context  or  the  other. 
Poen.  157  :  lenone  istoc  Lyco  non  lutumst  lutulentius.  Poen, 
291  :  lapide  silice  stultior.  Poen,  812  :  levior  plumast  gratia. 
Trin.  1154:  tunica  propior  palliost. 

Catullus. 

We  find  in  this  author  more  examples,  in  proportion  to  the 
amount  of  literature  he  has  left,  than  in  any  other.  In  expres.- 
sions  denoting  approximate  or  *  estimated '  value,  even  the  com- 
parative adverbs  take  the  ablative,  as  the  first  two  examples  show. 
3,  5  :  plus  oculis  suis  amabat.  14,  i  :  te  plus  oculis  meis 
amarem.  23,  12  :  corpora  sicciora  cornu.  23,  19  :  cuius 
purior  salillo.  23,   21  :    durius  faba  et  lapillis.  35,    16  : 

sapphica  puella  Musa  doctior.  48,  5  :   densior  aridis  aristis. 

64,   215:    iucundior  vita.  67,    21:   languidior   tenera  sicula 

beta.  68  B,  105  :  vita  dulcius  atque  anima.  68  B,  159  :  me 
carior  ipso.  80,  2  :  rosea  ista  labella  hiberna  candidiora  nive. 
81,  4  :  inaurata  pallidior  statua.  104,  2  :  quae  carior  est 
oculis.         107,  3  :  carius  auro. 

Cicero. 

Quint.  I,  4,  5  :  sunt  facta  verbis  difficiliora.  Compare  our 
*  Actions  speak  louder  than  words '  and  '  Easier  said  than  done ' . 
Att.  Ill,  22,  3  :  qui  mihi  me  cariores  semper.  Att.  X,  11,  i  : 
me  quidem  se  ipso  cariorem.  Fam.  X,  12,  5  :  mihi  vita  est  mea 
carior.  Also  in  Fam.  XI,  5,  3.  Fam.  XIV,  7,  i  :  nostra 
vita  dulcior  est.  C  31  :  lingua  melle  dulcior  fluebat  oratio. 
D.  I,  6:  solis  luce  clarius.  F.  I,  71  :  sole  ipso  illustriora  et 
clariora,  T.  I,  90  :  luce  clarius.  N.  I,  79  :  deo  pulcrior, 
(twice).  Invent.  II,  6,  22  :  pecuniam  vita  aut  officio  antiqui- 
orem.  Sest.  20,  45:  mihi  mea  carior  vita.  Sull.  31,  88: 
ei  vita  sua  multo  carior.  Mil.  2,6:  insidiae  clariores  hac  luce. 
Phil.  VIII,  10,  29  :  fuga  omni  morte  prior.         Phil.  XIII,  4,  7  : 


Proverbial  Expressions.  ■         63 

mihi  vita  mea  carior.  Cat.  I,  3,  6  :  luce  clariora.  Cat.  I, 
II,  27  :  mihi  vita  mea  multo  carior.  Or.  Post  Red.  ad  Quir. 
1,2:  vita  mea  cariores. 

Q.  Cicero. 

Epig.  de  Am.  Feminarum,  2  :  feminea  tutior  unda  fide. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

IV,  44  :  sermo  melle  dulcius. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  85,  41  :  ilia  epulis  iucundiora. 

Publilius  Syrus. 

72  :  bona  opinio  tutior  pecunia. 

F. 

There  are  other  examples,  whose  right  to  a  position  in  this 
category  some  would  question ;  —  they  may  be  literary  exten- 
sions of  the  idiom  just  considered.  Some  of  these  have  the  very 
adjectives  most  commonly  employed  in  the  universally  recognized 
proverbial  formulae. 

Plautus. 

Aul.  494  :  viliores  Gallicis  canthariis.  A  glance  at  the  ex- 
amples on  the  preceding  pages  will  be  sufficient  to  show  the  fre- 
quency  with   which   adjectives    of    price   and   value   are   used. 

Bacch.  888  :  confossiorem  soricina  nenia.  The  editors  of  this 
passage  agree  in  admitting  that  there  is  little  sense  in  it  as  it 
stands.  The  text  is  held  to  be  corrupt ;  hence  conjectures  of  all 
sorts  have  been  suggested.  However,  the  absolute  nonsense  of 
the  passage  may  be  its  sole  excuse  for  existence.  It  would  have 
its  effect  on  the  comic  stage. 

Catullus. 

25,  I  :  Cinaede  Thalle  mollior  cuniculi  capillo,  vel  anseris 
meduUula  vel  imula  oricula.  25,  5  :  Idemque  Thalle  turbida 
rapacior  procella.         38,  8  :  maestius  lacrimis  Simonideis. 


64  Proverbial  Expressions. 

Cicero. 

Att.  VII,  13,  b,  I  :  numero  Platonis  obscurius.  Piso,  26, 
63  :  Themista  sapientior. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  out  of  the  fifty-two  examples  of  proverbial 
expressions,  eleven  show  oculis  or  vita  as  the  second  term  of  the 
comparison.  The  adjectives  occurring  most  frequently  are  those 
of  general  value  (^carior  2i\\^  vilior — 11  times)  and  of  pleasantness 
and  desirability  {iucundior  and  dulcior — 5  times).  The  phrase 
luce  darior,  or  some  exact  equivalent,  e.^.,  sole  clarior,  appears 
four  times.  What  is  more  natural,  then,  than  that  we  should 
expect  to  find  the  ablative  employed  after  these  adjectives  in  sen- 
tences that  are  not  essentially  proverbial  in  character  ?  Such  ex- 
tensions are  very  common  phenomena  in  the  development  of 
language.     I  should  put  the  following  expressions  here  : 

1. 

Extensions  with  vila. 
Cicero. 
T.  V,  50  :  melius  vita  beata.     (twice.) 

ii. 
With  carior. 
Publilius  Syrus. 
151  :  Discordia  fit  carior  concordia. 

To  the  principle  of  this  category  there  are  several  exceptions 
some  of  which  present  the  same  idea  in  exactly  the  same  words  as 
the  proverbial  ablative  form  of  sentence.  Compare  for  example 
Plautus,  Men.  487,  Quid  ais,  homo  levior  quam  pluma?  with 
Poen.  812,  levior  plumast  gratia.     Further  exceptions  are  : 

Plautus. 

Epid.  371  :  Vorsutior  es  quam  rota  figularis.  There  is  no 
doubt  about  this  being  a  proverb  :  the  wheel  is  used  in  several 
instances  in  just  such  a  proverbial  association.     Besides  the  in- 


Proverbial  Expressions,  65 

stances  of  rota  fortunae  (See  Cic.  Piso,  10,  22  and  Ovid  Trist.  V, 
8,  7,  etc.),  there  are  cases  where  it  must  be  considered  proverbial 
in  use,  tho  unmodified  by  a  genitive,  e.  g.,  Plant.  Pers.  443  : 
citius  quam  rotula  circumvortitur.  The  addition  of  the  adjective 
to  modify  rota  \w  figularis  rota  need  cause  no  difl&culty,  it  is 
simply  an  extension  of  the  idea,  the  kernel  of  which  is  truly  pro- 
verbial in  character.  Pers.  244:  levius  pondust  quam  fides 
lenonia.  Fides,  like  rota,  is  often  used  in  proverbial  expressions 
in  Plautus.  Graeca  fide  Asin.  199  ;  Muliebri  fide,  Mil.  Gl.  456  ; 
also  Tibullus,  iii,  4,  61.  fidum  femina  nomen.  Punica  fides,  per- 
haps the  commonest  collocation  of  all,  occurs,  Sail.  Jug.  108  ; 
lyivy  XXI,  4,  9.  It  is  only  natural  with  the  scenes  and  plots  of 
Plautus  that  the  le7io  should  be  a  familiar  figure  to  every  person 
in  the  cast ;  leyionia  fides  would  in  that  stratum  of  society  be  a 
conception  very  readily  grasped.  We  have  evidence  enough  of 
that  in  the  extant  plays\  <?.  g.,  Rud.  1386:  lenonia  fides  uti  ; 
Rud.  346  :  lenonum  more  ;  Pers.  243  :  lenae  levifidae.  Cf.  also, 
Cure.  65  ;  Rud.  653;  and  Terence,  Ad.  161. 

Sallust 

Jug.  16,  adjiri.  :  carior  fides  quam  pecunia.  Cat.  25,  46  :  ei 

carior  omnia  quam  decus  atque  pudicitia.  This  possesses  one  of 
the  marks  of  the  proverb  in  carior^  and  the  idea  contained  is  such 
that  the  example  must  be  considered  proverbial. 

Publilius  Syrus. 

540 :  pluris  amicos  mensa  quam  mens  concipit.  Besides  its 
obvious  proverbial  character,  this  sentence  possesses  one  of  the 
characteristics  of  the  earliest  forms  of  the  proverb,  i.  e.,  allitera- 
tion.' 

There  are  many  categories  the  principles  of  which  apparently 
clash  with  this  proverbial  idea.  For  example,  adjectives  whose 
comparative  is  formed  with  magis  (Category  IX)  take  an  abla- 
tive here  ;  second  terms  of  the  comparison,   tho  modified  by  a 

^  Otto,  1.  c,  p.  189,  under  leno  where  the  above  examples  are  collected. 
1  Wolfflin,  1.  c,  p.  459. 
'Landgraf,  1.  c,  p.  i. 


66  Alius  Alio. 

genitive,  are  in  the  ablative  (Category  VI,  B)  ;  again  the  compar- 
ative is  nearly  always  modified  by  a  dative  in  our  typical  prover- 
bial expression  mihi  vita  mea  carior  (Category  VII)  ;  even  com- 
parative adverbs  sometimes  are  followed  by  an  ablative  (Category 
XXII).  The  greater  conciseness,  terseness,  and  emphasis  to  be 
gained  from  the  use  of  the  ablative  in  these  expressions  is,  in  my 
judgment,  the  strongest  reason  for  its  appearance  in  sentences 
that  are  proverbial  in  content. 


XIX. 

**  When  the  adjective  alius,  as  subject  of  a  comparative  clause, 
refers  to  a  preceding  alius  as  subject  of  the  first  term  of  compari- 
son "  \  the  ablative  is  the  prevailing  construction.  Such  a  juxta- 
position as  this,  with  its  repetition  of  exactly  the  same  word, 
points  strongly  to  a  continuation  of  the  idiom  from  a  very  early 
stage  in  the  history  of  the  language.  The  mere  fact  that  no  ex- 
amples are  forthcoming  for  any  author  earlier  than  Lucretius 
cannot  militate  against  this  theory. 

Lucretius. 

II,  510 :  aliis  aliud  taetrius.  II,  507  :  aliis  aliud  praestantius. 
IV,  688  :  alio  longius  alter.  Here  the  place  of  the  first  term  of 
the  comparison  is  taken  by  alter :  the  comparison  is  between  two 
persons  only.  We  notice  that  the  ablative  follows  an  adverb 
(Category  XXII).         V,  500  :  leviora  aliis  alia. 

Varro. 

R.  R.  I,  7,  9  :  alium  alio  agrum  meliorem  esse.  R.  R.  Ill, 
12,  4  :  alius  alio  plura. 

Cicero. 

F.  Ill,  48  :  alium  alio  sapientiorem.  F.  Ill,  48  :  alium 
magis   alio   peccare.  F.   IV,   43  :    errasse   alius   alio   magis. 

These  two  examples  are  after  adverbs,  contrary  to  the  general 

'  Fischer,  1.  c. 


special  Phrases  :   Opinione,  Etc.  67 

rule  (Category  XXII).  F.  IV,  54  :  aliud  alio  melius  et  peius. 
F.  IV,  67  :  vitia  alia  aliis  maiora  ;  also  F.  IV,  68.  F.  V,  83  : 
alius  alio  beatior.  F.  V,  95  :  alius  alio  beatior.  N.  I, 
80  :  aliam  alia  pulchriorem.  L,  I,  6  :  alius  alio  plus  habet 
virium.  The  *  genitive  of  the  whole '  is  generally  followed  by 
quam  (Category  II,  B).  O.  I,  7  :  aliud  alio  mains.  R.  I, 
42  :  aliud  alio  praestantius.  A.  II,  128  :  aliud  alio  magis 
minusve,    despite    the   adverb     (Category    XXII).  P.    20  : 

aliud  alio  mains  ant  minus.  Or.  60,  203  :  alius  alio  melior 
atque  aptior.  De  Or.  II,  84,  343  :  alia  alia  aptior.  Sest.  34, 
74  :  alius  alio  gravius  atque  ornatius  dixisset  (after  two  adverbs). 
Font.  10,  22  :  alius  alio  iudice  melior  aut  sapientior.  Fam. 
VII,  24,  2  :  alium  alio  nequiorera.  Att.  VII,  2,3:  aliam  alia 
iucundiorem.  Brut.  I,  4,  3  :  aliud  illo  peius.  Here  alio 
is  supplanted  by  illo. 

Six  of  these  twenty-eight  instances  are  after  comparative  ad- 
verbs, and  one  after  a  *  genitive  of  the  whole  '  construction  ;  both 
these  categories  have  quam  under  ordinary  circumstances. 


XX. 

In  English  we  have  such  comparative  sentences  as  *  more,  less, 
greater,  smaller,  than  you  expected,  believed,  hoped,  etc.^  In 
I^atin  these  appear  as  ablatives  (of  comparison)  of  the  substan- 
tives or  adjectives  that  correspond  to  this  verbal  idea.  Historically 
the  first  to  appear  is  opinione.  The  ablative  appears  regularly  : 
it  may  be  after  an  adverb  (Category  XXII)  ;  it  may  be  modified 
by  a  ^w/-clause  or  a  genitive.     Quam  opinio  never  occurs. 


Probably  in  the  original  form  of  the  expression  opinione  was 
without  modifiers.     Examples  of  this  occur  in 

Plautus. 

Aul.  543  :   opinione  melius  res  structast  domi.         Cas.  338  : 
opinione  melius  res  tua. 


68  Special  Phrases  :  Opinione^  Etc. 

Cicero. 

De  Or.  I,  35,  164  :  formam  opinione  meliorem  maioremque. 
Cat.  IV,  3,  6  :  latius  opinione.  Att.  VII,  6,  2  :  ilia  postulatio 
opinione  valentior.  iv?w.  XII,  15,  7  :  opinione  celerius.  This 
sentence  is  found  also  in  Fam.  XIV,  23. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  Ill,  24  :  opinione  timidiores.  This  is  Linker's  reading — 
most  editors  read  opinione  timoris. 

Sallust. 

J^S^-  53>  5  •  amplius  opinione.       Jug.  85,  3  :  opinione  asperius. 

B. 

An  extension  of  this  simple  construction  is  found  in  sen- 
tences where  the  opinione  is  modified  by  either  an  adjective  or  a 
genitive  of  a  noun  or  pronoun. 

Plautus. 

Amph.  545  :   plus  tua  opinione.  Mil.   Gl.   1238  :    opinione 

illius  pulcrior. 

Cicero. 

Brut.  1,1:  opinione  omnium  maiorem.  De  Or.  II,  24,  loi  : 
ilia  maior  opinione.         Fam.  X,  31,  6  :  opinione  tua  gratius. 

Caesar. 

^.  6^.  II,  3,  I  :  celerius  omni  opinione.  B.  G.  VIII,  8  :  celerius 
opinione  eorum.         B.  C.  Ill,  21,  i  :  minus  opinione  sua. 

C. 

Later  in  the  history  of  these  constructions  the  synonyms  of 
opinione  begin  to  appear,  e.  g. ,  expectatione. 

Caesar. 

j5.  C  II,  32,  II  :  mea  voluntate  et  vestra  expectatione  leviora. 

D. 

Parallel  with  this  use  of  exspectatione,  appears  spe,  which 
Drager  {Hist.  Syn.  i.  §  246)  says  occurs  for  the  first  time  in  Livy  : 


Plus^  Minus,  Longms,  Amplius.  69 

for  this  he  is  justly  censured  by  Wolfflin  (1.  c,  p.  461)  in  view  of 

the  instances  that  are  to  be  found  in  SaUust. 

Jug.   75,   8  :  commeatus  spe  amplior.         Hist.  3,  7  :  celerius 

spe  Mithridatis. 

£. 

Here  belong  aequo,  iusto,  and  substantive  adjectives. 

Plautus. 

Bacch.  349  :  plus  iusto  vehit.  No  other  examples  of  this  word 
occur  before  Horace  and  Virgil.^ 

Lucretius. 

There  are  at  least  four  instances  of  aequo  in  in  this  author, 
ni,  313  :  clementius  aequo.  Ill,  952  :  amplius  aequo.  IV, 
557:   longius  aequo.         IV,  1244:  concretius  aequo. 

Sallust. 

Cat.  51,  II  :  gravius  aequo. 

There  is  one  example  of  necessario^  to  be  found  in  this  period 
in  apparently  the  same  construction. 

Caesar. 
B.  G.  VII,  16,  3  :   longius  necessario. 


XXI. 

The  construction  with  plus,  minus,  longius,  amplius. 

It  is  well  recognized  i)  that  plus,  amplius,  minus,  longius,  when 
combined  with  numerals  or  words  whose  notion  is  inseparable 
from  the  numeral  idea  {e.g.,  biduum,  quinquennium) ,  2iX^  ix^- 
quently  used  without  quam  and  without  any  effect  on  the  con- 
struction of  the  second  element  of  the  comparison  ;  2)  that  the 
quam-Q.ov^^XxwoXxow  also  occurs ;  as  does  also  3)  the  ablative  of  com- 

^  Drager  (1.  c. )  says  none  occur  before  Horace. 

^  Drager  {\  246,  i)  "  unklar  ist  longius  necessario.'''' 


70  PluSy  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius. 

parison.  Against  the  recognition  of  this  latter  construction,  the 
objection  is  sometimes  raised  that  the  ablatives  we  find  are  original' 
not  due  to  the  comparative  idea  at  all — that  just  as  vi^e  find  dura- 
tion of  time  expressed  by  the  ablative  in  Apuleius,  so  we  have 
cases  of  it  in  early  Latin  :  it  is  a  feature  of  the  sermo  plebeius, 
which  accounts  for  so  many  words  appearing  in  '  early  and  post- 
classical  '  periods  but  disappearing  during  the  Golden  Age.  Such 
an  objection  must  certainly  lose  its  weight  in  the  face  of  testimony 
such  as  we  can  gather  from  Cicero  : 

A.  II,  147  :  cum  plus  uno  verum  esse  non  possit.  Top.  14, 

56  :  quod  in  disiunctione  plus  uno  verum  esse  non  potest. 

The  content  of  these  sentences  effectually  refutes  any  attempt 
to  explain  them  on  any  other  than  a  comparative-ablative  basis. 
What  holds  for  plus  should  undoubtedly  be  allowed  to  stand  for 
the  other  words  of  the  same  class.  If  we  find  one  instance  of  the 
ablative  after  these  words,  when  the  proper  construction  would 
be  the  accusative,  we  are  freed  from  the  necessity  of  assuming  an 
ablative  of  duration  of  time  to  explain  these  various  instances. 
For  purposes  of  clearness  and  convenience  these  four  words  will 
here  be  separated  and  given  individual  treatment. 

PLUS. 


Followed  by  the  ablative. 
Inscriptions. 

C.  I.  L.  I,  196,  21  :  neve  inter  ibei  virei  pious  duobus,  mulieri- 
bus  plus  tribus  arfuisse  velint. 

Plautus. 

Bacch.  818  :  plus  annis  decem.  Cure.  14  :  Plus  anno  scio. 
Men.  446  :  Plus  triginta  annis  natus  sum.  Here  the  text  is  cor- 
rupt :  Goetz  and  Schoell  were  quite  within  the  limits  of  the 
possible  when  they  conjectured  the  ablative. 

Catullus. 
I,  10:  plus  uno  maneat  perenne  saeculo. 


Plus,  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius.  71 

Cicero. 

Fani.  XIII,  29,  4  :  plus  duobus  aut  tribus  mensibus.  A.  II, 
79  :  plus  uno.  A.  11,  117  :  plus  uno.  Sex.  Pose.  74  :  plus 
triduo.  Verr.  Ill,  14,  36  :  plus  decuma.         De  Or.  II,  7,  30  : 

plus  uno  verum  non  possit. 

B. 

Followed  by  quam. 
Cicero. 

Verr.  Ill,  47,   113  :  plus  quam  X  medimna.  Verr.  Ill,  64, 

150  :  plus  quam  decumas.  Phil.  I,  8,  19  :  plus  quam  annum, 
biennium.  Phil.  II,  13,  31  :  plus  quam  decem  dies.  Phil. 
II,  38,  98  :  plus  quam  tres  aut  quattuor.  Brut.  18,  70  :  plus 
quam  quattuor  coloribus. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

1,17:  plus  quam  trium  partium. 

If  we  admit  the  correctness  of  the  theory  advanced  in  A  we  are 
forced  to  search  for  some  other  explanation  than  the  usually 
accepted  doctrine  of  parataxis^  for  the  sentence  where  plus  has  no 
influence  on  the  construction.  May  we  not  look  for  a  solution  in 
the  following  consideration  ?  It  is  indisputable  that  the  ablative  was 
the  earliest  comparative  construction  ;  as  such  it  would  be  the 
construction  used  almost  entirely  with  numerals  earlier  in  the  lan- 
guage. Now,  in  ordinary  intercourse  the  early  Romans  would 
have  occasions,  more  numerous  than  the  literature  shows,  to 
follow  plus  and  amplius  with  some  indeclinable  numeral  without 
any  noun.  In  our  ordinary  speech  we  are  more  likely  to  say 
(when  the  conversation  is  running  on  books,  for  example),  "  X 
has  more  than  a  hundred  "  than  "  X  has  more  than  a  hundred 
books."  For  the  same  sentence  the  Romans  would  say  centum, 
tho  feeling  the  necessity  of  an  ablative.     Repeated  usage  of  such 

'  The  explanation  usually  given  is  that  originally  the  sentence  had  some 
such  form  as  '  We  saw  four  hundred  men — yes,  more  '  :  and  the  order  of  one 
or  two  Latin  sentences  seems  to  support  this  view.  (See  among  others 
Bennett,  Appendix,  p.  181). 


72  Plus^  Minus,  Lo?igius,  Amplius. 

expressions  removed  any  feeling  of  an  ablative  there,  and  they 
began  to  think  it  was  simply  a  construction  unaffected  by  the 
omission  of  quant.  This  was  further  extended  until  it  invaded 
the  cases  where  the  noun  was  expressed  with  the  numeral.  A 
few  instances  of  the  original  simple  numeral  are  preserved  : 

Plautus. 

Mil.    Gl.    1064  :     plus   millest   modiorum,    where   we   should 

originally  have  had  an  ablative  if  mille  were  declined.  True. 

913  :  plus  decern  pondo. 

Varro. 

R.  R.l,  I,  T  :  plus  quinquaginta. 

Nepos. 

Thrasybulus,  2,  i  :  plus  triginta. 

C. 

The  subsequent  developments  of  the  tendency  exhibited  by 
these  three  follow.     The  construction  is  not  affected  : 

Inscriptions. 

C.  I.  ly.  I,  196,  19  :  Homines  pious  V  oinvorsei.  C.  I.  L. 
I,  200,  14  :  pequdes  maiores  non  plus  X  pascet.  C.  I.  L.  I, 
loii  :  plus  septem  naatam  annorum. 

Ennius. 

Ann.  423  :  Septingenti,  paullo  plus  aut  minus,  anni. 

Plautus. 

Bacch.  462  :  plus  triginta  annis.  Epid,  498  :  plus  quinquen- 
nium.        Pers.  21  \  plusculum  annum.        Stick.  160  :  plus  annos 

decem. 

Cato. 

Agr.  17,  2  :  plus  menses  VIII.        Agr.  45,  3  :  plus  III  digitos. 

Agr.   89,    i:    plus  horam  unam.         Agr.    113,    2:    plus  quad- 

riennium. 

Terence. 

Heaut.  451  :  ancillas  plus  decem.  Eun.  184:  plus  biduum. 
Adel.  199  :  plus  quingentos  colaphos. 


Plus^  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius.  y^ 

Varro. 

R.  R.  II,  I,  19:  plus  triennium.  R.  R.  I,  2,  9  :  plus  D 
iugera.  R.  R.  I,  57,  i  :  plus  aunos  C.  R.  R.  II,  3,  3  : 
pedes  plus  sexagenos.  R.  R.  Ill,  2,  14 :  plus  quinquagena 
milia.  R.  R.  Ill,  10,  4  :  plus  vicenos  pullos,  R.  R.  Ill, 
16,  34  :  plus  tertia  pars.         L.  L.  VII,  13  :  plus  unum  introitum. 

Cicero. 

Ati.  VI,  6,  3  :  plus  annum.  A^L  XII,  22,  3  :  plus  annum. 
Fam.  VIII,  5,  2  :  plus  biennium.  L.  II,  68  :  plus  quattuor 
versibus.  Quind.  12,  41  :  plus  annum.  Sest.  39,  85  :  plus 
viginti  vulneribus  acceptis.         R.  II,  40  :  plus  mille  quingentos. 

Auctor  ad  Herennium. 

Ill,  32  :  plus  aut  minus  pedum  trinum. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  Ill,  6,  2  :  plus  tertia  parte  interfecta. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  of  the  fifty-five  examples  with  plus  twelve 
have  the  ablative,  nine  have  quam  and  in  thirty-four  plus  has  no 
effect  on  the  construction.  Only  one  example  comes  from  Caesar, 
who,  as  the  next  section  will  show  prefers  amplius  to  plus. 

AMPLIUS. 

I  follow  the  same  order  with  amplius  as  with  plus. 

A. 

Ablative  is  used. 

Cicero. 

Q.  Rose.  9  :  triennio  amplius. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  I,  15,  :  amplius  quinis  aut  senis  milibus  passuum.  B. 
G.  II,  7  :  ampHus  miUbus  passuum  VIII  patebant.  B.  G.  Ill, 
5,  I  :  amplius  horis  sex  pugnaretur.  B.  G.  IV,  37  :  amplius 
horis  quattuor  pugnaverunt.  B.    G.   VIII,    18,    i  :    amplius 


74  Plus,  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius. 

paten  tern  passibus  mille.         B.   G.  VIII,   29  :    amplius  milibus 
XII  armatorum. 

Sallust. 

Cat.  56,  2  :  amplius  duobus  milibus  habuisset.  Jug.  76,  i  : 
amplius  uno  die  aut  una  nocte  moratus. 

B. 

Quam  is  used. 
Cicero. 

Verr.  II,  31,  77  :  amplius  quam  trium  iudicum.  Verr.  Ill, 

48,  114:    amplius  quam  terna  medimna.  Verr.  Ill,  48,  115: 

amplius  quam  singulas,  plus  quam  ternas  decumas  darent.         De 
Or.  I,  50,  215  :  amplius  quam  singulas  artes. 

Nepos. 

Thras.  4,  2  :  amplius  quam  centum  iugera.  Etcmenes,  12, 
4:    amplius  quam  triduum.  Atticus,    13,   6:    amplius  quam 

terna  milia. 

C. 

No  influence  upon  the  construction. 

Here  I  give,  first,  four  examples  where  it  would  be  absolutely 
impossible  for  the  form  to  receive  a  definite  ablative  imprint  be- 
cause the  numerals  are  indeclinable. 

Cicero, 

Fam.  VIII,  12,  4:  amplius  quadriginta.  Att.  VI,  2,  8: 
amplius  quinquaginta. 

Nepos. 

Pelop.  2,3:  amplius  centum. 

Sallust. 

Jug.  68,  3  :  amplius  mille  passuum  abesse. 

Inscriptions. 

C.  I.  L.,  I,  198,  23  :  ne  amplius  de  una  familia  unum. 
C.    I.    I/.,    I,    200,    14:     iugra   non   amplius   XXX   possidebit. 


Plus^  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius.  75 

C.  I.  L.,  I,  200,  60 :  amplius  iugera  CC.  C.  I.  L.,  I,  200,  86  : 
amplius  ea  dare  debeto.  C.  I.  L.,  I,  206,  151  :  amplius  dies 
LX  reliqui  erant. 

The  extensions  of  this  construction  appear  first  in 

Cato. 

Agr.  150,  2  :  agnos  XXX  amplius. 

Catullus. 

99,  3  :  amplius  horam. 

Cicero. 

Verr.  I,  5,   14  :  cum  Syracusis  amplius  centum  cives  Romani. 

Verr.  IV,  43,  95  :  horam  amplius.  Verr.  V,  59,  155  :  amplius 

centum  cives  Romanos.         Q.  Rose.  3,  8  :  amplius  sex   menses. 

Q.  Rose.  3,  8  :  amplius  triennium,  (twice).      Font.  3,  4  :  hominum 

sescentorum    amplius.  Flaee.    26,    63 :     septingentos    annos 

amplius.         Brut.    17,   65  :    orationes  amplius  centum  quinqua- 

ginta.         Or.  67,   224:  ternis  amplius  utendum.         A.  II,  82: 

amplius  duodeviginti  partibus  maiorem.         Ad  Quint.  Ill,  3,1: 

dierum   amplius   quinquaginta   intervallo.  Fam.  V,   loa,   3  : 

oppida  amplius  sexaginta.  Fam.    X,    34,    i  :    amplius  milia 

quinque.        Fa7n.  XII,  14,  i  :  amplius  centum  naves.        Att.  II, 

16.    I  :  amplius  quinque  milia.         Att.   VIII,    12a,   2  :    amplius 

XIII  cohortes  ;  also  Att.  VIII,  12c.  2.      Att.  XII,  17  :  amplius 

annis  XXV. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  I,  41,  4:  milium  amplius  quinquaginta  circuitu.  B. 
G.  II,  16,  I  :  amplius  milia  passuum  X.  B.  G.  II,  29,  3  :  aditus 
amplius  ducentorum  pedum.  B.  G.  Ill,  6,  2  :  ex  milibus  am- 
plius XXX.  B.  G.  IV,  12,  i:  amplius  octingentos  equites. 
B.  G.  V,  8,  6  :  amplius  octingentae  visae  erant.  B.  G.  VI,  29, 
4:  milibus  amplius  quingentis.  B.  6^.  VII,  15,  i:  amplius  XX 
urbes.  B.  G.  VIII,  4  :  amplius  XVIil  dies  moratus.  B.  G. 
VIII,  10,  5  :  amplius  quingenti.  B.  G.  VIII,  36,  i  :  a  mili- 
bus non  amplius  XII.  B.  C.  I,  46,  5  :  milites  amplius  CC. 
B.   C.   II,   24,   4 :    amplius  passus  mille.         B.   C.   Ill,   99,   i  : 


76  Plus,  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius. 

amplius  C  C  milites.  B.  C.  Ill,  99,  4  :  ampliiis  milia  XXIV. 
Caesar  presents  some  instances  in  which  an  ablative  is  used,  but 
where  there  is  some  doubt  whether  the  ablative  is  original  or  due 
to  the  comparative  construction.  The  verb  in  each  case  is  abesse 
or  an  equivalent  idea.  Take,  for  example,  B.  G.  I,  23  :  amplius 
milibus  passuum  XVIII  aberat.  If  the  construction  is  originally 
an  accusative  as  B.  G.  II,  17,2  {legiones  magnum  spatium  aberant) 
would  lead  us  to  conclude,  the  ablative  must  be  due  to  the  influ- 
ence of  the  comparative.  If  the  original  construction  is  the  abla- 
tive, then  amplius  does  not  effect  it.  Caesar  furnishes  a  parallel 
for  this  too.  B.  G.  I,  43  :  hie  locus  aequo  fere  spatio  aberat. 
Two  other  examples  from  Caesar  present  precisely  the  same  difii- 
culty.  B,  G.  IV,  II,  I  :  amplius  passuum  XII  milibus  abesset. 
B.  C  I,  82,  4  :  amplius  pedum  milibus  duobus  castra  distabant. 

Sallust. 

J^^g'  9i»  3-  amplius  duum  milium  intervallo.        Jug.  105,  3: 

cum  mille  amplius  equitibus.         Cat.  59,  6  :   amplius  annos  tri- 

ginta. 

Nepos. 

Hamilcar,  2,  4  :  amplius  centum  milia  armatorum.  Hanni- 
bal, 2,  3  :  amplius  novem  annos  nato.  Atticus,  18,  6  :  amplius 
quaternis  quinisve  versibus. 

MINUS. 
A. 

Ablative  is  used. 
Cicero. 

Verr.  Ill,  48,  114:  minus  tribus  medimnis. 

B. 

Quant  is  used. 

By  some  peculiar  coincidence  there  are  no  examples  of  this  con- 
struction in  the  period  covered  by  this  investigation. 


Plus,  Minus,  Lo7igius,  Amplius.  77 

C. 

Without  influence  on  the  construction. 

Plautus. 

Trin.  402  :  minus  quindecim  dies  sunt. 

Cato. 

Agr.  161,  4  :  minus  pedes  singulos. 

Varro. 

R.  R.  I,  18,  3  :  minus  CCXLiugera.         R.  R.  II,  4,  2  :  minus 

Septimus  sum.         R.  R.  Ill,  2,    17  :  minus  decem  milia.         R. 

R.  Ill,  8,   I  :    minus  tres  pedes.         R.  R.,  Ill,  9,   13:    minus 

triginta  pullos. 

Cicero. 

Verr.    I,  47,   123:    minus   dimidium.  Verr.  II,  57,   140: 

minus  XXX  diebus.         Afl.  XIV,  1,1:  minus  diebus  XX. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.   II,  7,  3  :    ab  miUbus  minus  duobus.         B.  G.  V,  42  : 

minus  horis  tribus. 

Nepos. 

EumeneSy  9,  2  :  minus  totidem  dierum  spatio.  Themistocles , 

5,2:  minus  diebus  triginta  reversus  est. 

There  is  one  case  where  it  is  not  possible  to  determine  the 
nature  of  the  construction.  Caesar,  i5.  C  II,  37,  3  :  minus  V  et 
XX  mihbus  ab  Utica  eius  copias  abesse.  This  is  another  of  those 
abesse  constructions  where  the  ablative  may  be  due  to  the  com- 
parative or  be  ablative  of  *  degree  of  difference'. 

D. 

Maior  and  Minor. 

No  change  in  construction  is  produced  by  minor  in  the  follow- 
cases  : 

Inscriptions. 

C.  I.  I/.  I,  198,  13  :  minor  annos  XXX  maiorve  annos  lyX 
gnatus  siet. 


78  Plus,  Minus,  Longius,  Amplius. 

Varro. 

R.  R.  II,  7,  I  :  minores  trimae,  maiores  decern  annorum.  R. 
R.  II,  2,  i8  :  agniim  minorem  quinque  mensum. 

Cicero. 

Fam.  XII,  15,  2  :  minor  nulla  erat  duum  milium  amphorum, 
Sex.  Rose.  14,  39  :  annos  natus  maior  quadraginta. 

But  these  can  be  taken  as  no  criterion  for  expressions  of  age. 
for  there  are  at  least  three  examples  where  these  same  adjectives 
do  influence  the  construction,  viz  : 

Cicero. 

Sex.  Rose.  35,  100  :  quem  minorem  annis  I<X.  Verr.  II,  49, 

122  :  minor  XXX  annis  natus. 

Aelius  Tubero. 

Hist.  Frag.  1,4:  qui  minores  annis  septem  decern.  (Peter, 
201). 

LONGIUS. 

All  the  examples  of  longius  except  two  occur  in  Caesar.  The 
word  exhibits  the  same  peculiarities  that  we  have  noticed  in  the 
treatment  of  plus  and  amplius. 

A. 

The  Ablative. 

Caesar. 

B.  G.  IV,  I  :  longius  anno  remanere  licet.  B.  G.  IV,  11  : 
longius  milibus  passuum  IV  processurum. 

Longius  quam. 

The  only  instance  of  this  construction  is  from 

Varro. 

L.  L.Y,  III  :  longius  quam  duo  ilia. 


Plus,  Minus,  Lo7igius,  Amplius.  79 

C. 

Longius  with  no  influence  on  the  construction. 

C.  I.  L.  I,  196,  63  :  dum  mi  longius  C  dies  edat. 

With  adverbs  of  rest  expressing  separation  or  difference  in 
position,  it  is  difficult  to  determine  what  construction  we  have ; 
abesse  has  been  mentioned  before  ;  there  are  other  verbs  which 
convey  the  same  idea  and  which  present  the  same  difficulty. 
From  a  consideration  of  Caes.  B.  G.  VI,  7,  2  :  abeo  non  longius 
bidui  via  aberant,  we  are  perhaps  justified  in  concluding  that 
these  are  all  original  ablatives  tho  B.  G.  V,  53  {longius  milia 
passuum  VIII  ab  hibernis  suis  adfuisse)  points  to  a  different  con- 
clusion. Doubtful  examples  of  this  sort  (all  from  Caesar)  I  place 
here  for  convenience  in  arrangement. 

B.  G.  1,  22,  I  :    longius  mille  et  quingentis  passibus  abesset. 

B.  G.  VII,  9,  2  :  longius  triduo  ab  castris  absit.  B.  G.  VII,  79, 
I  :  longius  M  passibus  considunt.  B.  G.  VIII,  20  :  longius  ab 
ea  caede  abesse  plus  minus  octo  milibus.  Here  all  three  words 
plus,  mimis,  longius  might  have  had  an  effect  on  the  construction. 
Plus  minus  in  content  are  equal  to  fere.  This  would  leave  the 
comparative  force  to  longius  alone — in  fact,  this  is  the  only  com- 
parative that  stands  out  prominently  in  sense.  Kiibler  omits  plus 
minus,  but  most  editors  read  the  sentence  as  cited. 

There  is  one  example  where  there  is  no  diflSculty  in  deciding 
that  longius  does  not  influence  the  construction — this  is  from 
Caesar  also. 

B.  G.  IV,  ID  :  longius  milibus  passuum  LXXX  in  Oceanum 
influit. 

PROPIUS. 

There  are  only  a  few  instances  in  which  this  word  has  the  same 
construction  as  the  foregoing  (see  Drager,  i.  §  246-5) — always 
without  influence  on  the  case. 

Inscriptions. 

C.  I.  ly.  I,  206,  50  :  propiusve  urbem  passus  M  purgandeis. 

Cicero. 
Phil.  VI,  3,  5  :  propius  urbem  Romam  ducenta  milia  admoveret. 


8o 


General  Adverbs. 


To  sum  up  the  results  of  this  last  category  the  following  table 
is  presented  : 


plus 

amplius 
minus  _. 
longius. 
propius. 


Abl. 

Quam. 

13 

9 

9 

7 

I 

0 

2 

I 

25 

17 

No  Influence. 

Doubtful. 

34 

4 

47 

7 

15 

I 

2 

4 

2 

— 

100 

16 

Total. 

60 
70 
17 

9 

2 


158 


Of  the  two  words  that  occur  the  most  frequently  (^plus  and 
amplius),  the  latter  seems  to  be  later  in  use  :  it  takes  the  place  of 
plus  in  Caesar  almost  entirely.  We  should  naturally  expect,  there- 
fore, that  it  would  show  a  greater  percentage  of  instances  where 
the  construction  is  unaffected,  and  a  lesser  with  ablative.  This  is 
just  what  we  find  :  the  proportion  of  ablatives  12.9  :  21^ — the 
proportion  of  uninfluenced  consts.  67.  :  56.6.  This  supports  my 
contention  as  to  the  origin  of  the  idiom. 


XXII. 
GENERAL  ADVERBS. 

The  usual  rules  for  the  treatment  of  comparative  constructions 
draw  no  distinctions  between  adjectives  and  adverbs,  tho  no  line 
of  difference  could  be  more  plainly  marked  than  that  which 
divides  their  use.  With  very  few  exceptions,  if  we  omit  the 
instances  in  the  previous  section,  comparative  adverbs  are  followed 
by  quam.  The  examples  of  this  use  are  so  numerous  that  it 
would  be  useless  to  attempt  to  give  them  all  ;  but  the  statistics 
that  can  be  gathered  from  the  complete  collection  of  instances  at 
my  disposal  will  be  presented. 

It  is  remarkable  how  few  adverbs  are  used,  other  than  potius, 
minus,  magis,  plus,  and  melius. 


General  Adverbs. 
Potius. 


8i 


Author. 


Naevius__ 
Accius  __. 
Turpilius. 
Plautus  __ 
Terence  __ 

Cicero 

Sallust  __. 
Caesar 


With 

Without 

Quatn. 

Quam. 

I 

0 

I 

0 

I 

0 

22 

0 

5 

0 

220 

0 

4 

0 

4 

0 

258 

0 

292 

0 

Author. 


Varro  . 
Nepos. 
Syrus. 


With 
Quam. 


28 
5 


34 


Without 
Quam. 


This  shows  a  total  of  292  instances  with  quam  and  none  without. 

Plus. 


Author. 

Quam. 

Without 
Quam. 

Author. 

Quam. 

Without 
Quam, 

Plautus  __ 

II 

I 

3 

113 

2 

0 
0 
0 
i^ 
2*^ 

Caesar 

Nepos 

4 
4 
2 
2 

0 

Cato 

0 

Terence 

Cicero 

sSallust 

Syrus     - 

0 
0 

Catullus  _ 

130 

3 

12 

0 

This  represents  a  total  of  142  plus  quams  and  but  3  oi  plus  with 

the  ablative. 

Melius. 


Author. 

Quam. 

Without 
Quam. 

Author. 

Quam. 

Without 
Quam. 

Plautus      .     _  . 

7 

I 
I 

2» 

0 
0 

Cicero 

Sallust 

Syrus 

41 

I 
2 

I* 

Accius 

Varro 

0 
0 

This  represents  fifty-three  instances  of  melius  quam.  and  three 
of  melius  with  the  ablative. 

^  De  Or.  I,  I,  4  :  neque  quisquam  plus  valere  te  potest, — due  to  the  uni- 
versal negative  (see  Category  XV.) 

'  3,  5  ;  14,  I  :  in  proverbs.     These  are  already  quoted  p.  62. 

^Aul.  543  ;  Cas.  338  ;  melius  in  each  case  is  used  with  opinions  (see  Cate- 
gory XX). 

*An  instance  of  the  ablative  in  a  universal  negative  sentence  ;  Brut.  12, 
47,  quo  neminem  umquam  melius  ullam  oravisse  capitis  causam. 


82 


General  Adverbs. 


Magis. 

More  frequent  than  the  use  of  any  other  single  word  is  that  of 
magis.  In  several  instances,  of  course,  it  is  simply  the  sign  of 
the  comparative  of  an  adjective  ;  even  then,  as  we  have  seen,  its 
adverbial  force  is  strong  enough  to  produce  the  ^w«w-construction. 


Authors. 

Quam. 

No   quam. 

Authors. 

Quam. 

No  quam. 

Ennius- 

3 

3 

22 
I 
3 

5 
5 

o 
o 
o 
o 
o 
o 
o 
o 

Cicero 

264 

I 

4 
II 
20 

61 

Naevius 

Syrus 

0 

Other  early  poets 
Plautus 

Caesar  _  _     

0 

Nepos 

0 

Cato 

Sallust 

0 

Terence. 

Lucietius 

Varro 

43 

o 

300 

6 

The  total  number  of  instances  with  quam  is  343  ;  without  quam  6. 

Minus. 


Author. 

Quam. 

No  quam. 

Author. 

Quam. 

No  quam. 

Turpilius 

Plautus  __  _     ___ 

I 
6 
I 
5 
I 
3 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

Cicero 

55 
3 
2 

9 

I 

0 

Caesar    _____ 

i^ 

Cato_  „_       _     ._ 

iSallust  _  _ 

0 

Terence  ___   .     _ 

Nepos 

0 

Lucretius    _ 

Syrus    _  _  _  

0 

Varro 

17 

0 

68 

I 

^B.  C.  Ill,  21,  I,  with  5/^. 

The  total  number  of  instances  wiih  quam  is  85  ;  without  quam^  i. 


^  Four  of  these  come  under  the  alius  alio  category,  viz  :   F.  Ill,  48  ;  F. 

IV,  43  ;  A.  II,  128  ;  Sest.  34,  74.  These  are  all  quoted  in  Category  XIX. 
One  of  the  others  falls  under  the  rhetorical  question  rule.  Category,  XVI, 
{^F.  Ill,  76),  quid  philosophia  magis  colendum  ;  the  other  under  the  uni- 
versal negative  (Category  XV)  qua  nihil  meumquam  delectavit  magis  {^Att. 

V,  20,  I.) 


General  Adverbs.  83 


Other  Adverbs. 


The  remarkable  regularity  noticeable  in  the  foregoing  adverbs  is 
duplicated  in  those  to  follow.  First  in  point  of  frequency  come 
facilius  and  prius,  with  fifteen  examples  each  and  no  exceptions 
to  the  ^w«w-construction.  There  are  thirteen  examples  of  ciiius ;  ^ 
celerius^  appears  nine  times  ;  libentius,  gravius,^  and  vehementius*' 
seven  times  each— as  do  also  diligentius^  sapieyitius,^  peius,^  longi- 
us  z''  there  are  four  examples  of  ff7//<?^/2^^,  saepius,  diutius,  honesti- 
us;  three  oi propzus,  rectius,  mahirius ,  fortius .  Naturally  as  the 
number  of  examples  decreases,  the  number  of  words  showing  these 
examples  increases.  We  find  a  longer  list  where  there  are  but  two 
examples  of  each,  viz  :  setius,  difficilius^  commodius,  familiarius, 
actus,  uberius,  acrius,  amplius} 

The  list  of  adverbs  that  occur  but  once  is  longer  still. 

accuratius,    Cic.    Or.    52,    174.  acutius,    Cic.    D.    II,    12. 

aegrius,  Cicero,    T.   IV,   81.  asperius\  Sallust,  Jug.   85,   3. 

carius,  Varro,  R.  R.  Ill,  16,  23.         clarius,  Cicero,  Div.  Caec. 


^  There  are  two  exceptions  included  in  this  number — citius  +  an  abl ;  one 
in  a  proverb,  viz  ;  Plant.  Aul.  600,  (see  Category  XVIII)  ;  the  other  in  a  uni. 
versal  negative  sentence,  Cic.  Invent.  I,  56,  109  ;  lacrima  nihil  citius  arescit- 

'  Five  times  celerius  has  an  ablative  case  ;  four  times  with  opinione,  Cic. 
Fam.  XII,  15,  7  ;  XIV,  23  ;  Caesar  B.  G.  II,  3,  i  ;  VIII,  8,  5  ;  once  with  spe 
Sallust,  Hist.  3,  7  (see  Category  XX). 

'  Gravius  4-  abl.  is  found  in  Sail.  Cat.  51,11  with  the  adjective  aequo  (see 
Category  XX). 

*  In  a  universal  negative  sentence  (Cic.  D.  II,  144)  an  abl.  is  found,  avi 
volat  nulla  vehementius. 

^  One  ablative — Cicero  Fam.  II,  7,  i  :  nemo  est  qui  tibi  sapientius  suadere 
possit  te  ipso. 

^In  one  negative  sentence  (Category  XV)  we  get  peius  with  an  ablative, 
Cic.  Fam.  XI,  5,  2  ;  once  in  a  proverb  {Most.  291)  and  once  with  opinione 
{Amph.  545)  (see  Category  XX). 

'  Two  of  these  examples  are  in  a  negative  sentence  and  so  have  the  ablative. 
These  are  both  from  Cicero.  T.  IV,  47  :  quo  longius  mens  humana  progredi 
non  potest.  Att.  IX,  16,  2  :  nihil  a  me  abesse  longius  crudelitate.  Another 
exception  occurs  in  the  alius  alio  category  (Lucr.  IV,  688,  see  Category 
XIX).  We  find  longius  aequo  in  Lucretius  IV,  557,  and  longius  necessario 
in  Caesar,  B.  G.  VII,  16,  3  (see  Category  XX). 

^Both  examples  of  amplius  are  with  the  ablative,  once  with  opinione 
Sallust, /«^.  53,  5  (see  Category  XX),  once  with  aequo  (Lucr.  Ill,  952.) 


84  General  Adverbs. 

15,  48.  clementius^  Lucretius,  III,  313.  concretius\  Lucre- 
tius, IV,  1244.  crebrius,  Plautus,  Rud.  102.  eruditius,  Cicero, 
C  3.  exquisitius,  Cicero,  Brut.  93,  322.  gratius^  Cic.  Fam. 
X,  31,  6.  incorruptius,  Cicero,  Marc.  9,  29.  latius\  Cicero, 
Cat.  IV,  36.  liberalius,  Cic.  Att.  VI,  3,  5.  liberius,  Cic. 
Or.  23,  82.  litteratius,  Cicero,  Brut.  28,  108.  manifestius, 
Cicero,  Verr.  Ill,  62,  144.  molestius,  Cicero,  ad  Quint,  I,  i, 
2.  neglegentius,  Cicero,  Att.  Ill,  12,  2.  ornatius,  Cicero, 
de  Or.  I,  15,  67.  proclivius,  Lucr.  II,  792.  prudentius, 
Cicero,  D.  II,  12.  pudentius,  Cicero,  Att.  VII,  2,  4.  pudi- 
cius,  Plaut.  Merc.  714.  sanctius,  Cicero,  N.  Ill,  50.  subti- 
lius,  Cicero  Z.  I,  13.  sumptuosius,  Varro,  R.  R.  Ill,  17,  6. 
truculentius,  Cicero,  Leg.  Agra.  II,  5,  13  verius,  Cicero,  O. 

II,  27. 

Summing  up  these  examples  we  find  that  out  of  nearly  eleven 
hundred  examples  (1093)  all  but  thirty-seven  have  the  quam-con- 
struction,  and  everyone  of  these  thirty-seven  is  capable  of  expla- 
nation, i.  e. — a  cause  sufficient  to  produce  the  result  in  each  case 
is  recognizable. 

Naturally,  when  we  use  the  term  *  ablative  of  comparison  * 
we  think  that  some  comparative  adjective  or  adverb  must  be 
present  in  the  sentence.  A  few  examples,  met  casually  in  the 
search  for  material  for  the  main  portion  of  my  investigation,  show 
that  we  have  to  recognize  an  ablative  of  comparison  after  positives 
as  early  as  Plautus, — positives  which  have,  however,  in  their  very 
significance  the  suggestion  of  comparison.  A  few  of  these  may 
be  added  for  the  sake  of  completeness. '^ 

Plautus. 

Amph.  293  :  nullust  hoc  metuculosus  aeque.  Cas.  684 : 
neque  fuit  me  senex  quisquam  amator  adaeque  miser.         Cure. 

^  These  adverbs  appear  with  opinione. 

2  These  appear  with  aequo. 

'  I  do  not  for  a  moment  claim  that  this  is  an  exhaustive  list.  The  examples 
were  noticed  casually,  and  afterward  many  of  them  were  found  to  have  been 
collected  in  Drager,  1.  c.  |  246,  3,  and  Ebrard,  1.  c,  §  11  end. 


Conclusions.  85 

141  :  Qui  me  in  terra  aeque  fortunatus  erit  ?  Most.  30 :  quo 
nemo  adaeque  est  habitus  parous  nee  magis  continens. 

In  a  few  instances  alius  causes  the  appearance  of  the  ablative  : 
This  is  a  striking  parallel  to  the  use  of  aAAos  and  lr(.po<i  with  the 
genitive  in  Greek  and  of  any  as  with  the  ablative  in  Sanskrit. 

Varro,  R.  R.  Ill,  16,  23  :  quod  est  aliut  melli  et  propoli. 
Cic.  Fam.  XI,  2,  2  :  nee  quidquam  aliud  libertate  communi 
quaesisse. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

The  conclusions  that  we  are  justified  in  drawing  from  this  mass 
of  material  will  be  plainest  if  presented  in  tabular  form.  This 
table  will  simply  represent  a  convenient  grouping  of  similar  cate- 
gories that  have  been  developed  in  the  investigation. 

I.  Quam  always  occurs  when  the  comparative  adjective  is  not 

in  agreement  with  a  nominative  or  an  accusative  as  the 
first  term  of  the  comparison. 

Within  the  scope  left  by  I, 

II.  Quam  regularly  occurs, 

a')  When  the  second  term  of  the  comparison  is  modified 
by  a  clause. 

^)  When  either  term  is  modified  by  a  genitive  of  a  noun 
or  pronoun,  or  by  an  adjective. 

c)  When  the  comparative  adjective  is  modified  by  an 

ablative  of  degree  of  difference  or  b}^  a  dative. 

d)  When  the  comparative  is  formed  by  magis. 

e)  When  the  comparative  agrees  with  an  accusative  used 

as  subject  of  an  infinitive  in  a  positive  sentence. 

/)  When  the  comparative  is  an  adverb,  except  where  we 
have/>/2^5,  amplius,  minus,  or  longius  with  numeral 
expressions,  or  the  idiom  mentioned  in  V  below. 

III.  Quam  or  the  ablative  is  used  indifferently ^ 


86  Conclusions. 

a)  When  the  comparative  agrees  with  an  accusative,  the 

object  of  a  verb  in  a  positive  sentence. 

b)  Where  the  adjective  agrees  with  the  first  term  in  the 

nominative. 

IV.  The  ablative  is  regularly  used  in, 

a)  Universal  negative  sentences,  whether  of  the  nomina- 
tive or  accusative  type. 

}))  Rhetorical  questions. 

c)  Proverbial  expressions. 

V.  The  ablative  is  always  used  in  the  expressions 

a)  alius  alio. 

b)  opinionCy  spe,  expedatione ^  aequo,  iusto. 


ADDENDA  ET  CORRIGENDA. 


Page  17 — Before  R.  I,  49  add  N.  Ill,  21  :  nihil  mundo  sapienti- 

us  ;  and  N.  Ill,  24  :  Quid  Chalcidico  Euripo  putas  fieri  posse 

constantius  ? 
Page  17 — Before  P.  21,  insert  A.  II,  56:  nihil  errore,  levitate, 

temeritate  diiunctius. 
Page  17 — Before  Sest.  10,  23,  include  Phil.  XII,  7,  15  :  nihil  foe- 

dius  servitute. 
Page  20 — After  the  Plautus  example  should  appear  one  from 

Terence,  Andr.  31  :  quid  est  quod  tibi  mea  ars  efficere  hoc 

possit  amplius  ? 
Page  20 — Before  Ti.  21,  insert  Ti.   10:  nihil  intelligente  prae- 

stantius. 
Page  47 — Before  N.  II,  66,  insert  N.  II,  39  :  nihil  mundo  per- 

fectius;  N.  II,  45  :  quo  nihil  excellentius  ;  N.  II,  21  :  nee 

mundo  quicquam  melius. 
Page  53— Before  N.  Ill,  24,  insert  N.  II,  31  :  Quid  potest  mundo 

valentius  ? 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN     INITIAL    FINE      OF     25     CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $I.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


'JAN  21  1933 


LD  21-50m-8,'32 


U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CD^S^D3fll3 


99719 


